Some ideas about layout:

About the way to organize the class hierarchy, it's not ideal to have a
specialized descendant of OXCompositeFrame for each type of layout,
because general widgets (like dialog boxes) can either be vertically or
horizontaly arranged. If we choose a structure like this

 OXCompositeFrame
   |
   +--OXVerticalFrames
   |
   +--OXHorizontalFrames

  etc...

then we must have multiple descendant for each type of layout, e.g.:
OXMenuVertical, OXMenuHorizontal, etc.

We can't either to have a pointer to a layout function for technical
reasons (C++ won't let us point at a member function).

So far, we have used flags to implement all the different layout policies
in a single OXCompositeFrame object: it's not clean, and it's not easily
expandable. 

So, I propose to consider layout as a separate entity (read: object),
similar to the Java AWT concept. 

 OLayoutManager
   |
   +--OVerticalLayout
   |
   +--OHorizontalLayout
   |
   +--OVerticalTiledLayout

That way a OXCompositeFrame object contains a layout manager object that
could even be changed at runtime.

Layout Policy: 

- inner (child) frames *never* modify parent's size; instead the parent
  can (or cannot) adapt it's own size in order to show all (or part) of
  its content. 

- a frame (particularly OXSimpleFrame) has a default minimum size under
  which it cannot shrink: the limit is 1,1 to avoid XLib errors. 

- we do not define a maximum size yet.
