Hi Stefan, *
Stefan Taxhet schrieb:
Hi,
It's interesting and encouraging to see how much activity a proposed
change of the set of document icons can trigger.
But I think it's unfortunate that the discussion tends to fray out.
This is always a problem with topics affecting different teams and projects.
If I want to involve experts on a certain subtopic, I have to join their
group, ask for their opinion and support and come back with the results
to the main discussion list.
I
know that some of you are already subscribed to disc...@ux and would
suggest to others to do so (discuss-subscr...@ux.openoffice.org). Input
from an "artworker"'s point of view is certainly welcome there.
Even if I support your invitation - not every artist is interested in UX
(happens quite often in such a diversified project like OOo - not even
all active contributors subscribe to disc...@ooo).
Therefore I asked for support on the design here, collected the first
ideas and will come back with the results to disc...@ux.ooo during the
next days.
Of course it means to repeat parts of the discussion held at the other
places, but that's exactly the point: A discussion without involving the
experts will not be as well funded as on their own list.
It is important to keep the main discussion in one place, but for
special questions we have to ask the specialists at their project.
Like on d...@marketing the result of the work here will be transported to
the UX project - and perhaps we'll see one or another Art Project member
on disc...@ux.ooo because working on the topic raised his or her
attention on the general idea of ODF icons.
I don't konw if I can post the mail on disc...@ux.ooo today, but I'll do
it as soon as possible.
Best regards
Bernhard
In my eyes it is not possible to get optimal results, if we just
If I only could set the reply-to: header, but that's a different story...
Thanks
Stefan
Bernhard Dippold wrote:
Martin Hollmichel schrieb:
Hi Bernhard,
Bernhard Dippold wrote:
Hi Jens, Nik, all
thanks for joining this task and for uploading your drafts.
I'd like to comment on both of your designs and add a few thoughts
not mentioned before (at least not here on this list):
Jens: Your app icons look great, but I don't think we should change
them in such a radical way with a minor release. If people don't
recognize their applications and files, they might become upset...
I find them interesting as well. On some colors the seagulls could
have some more contrast...
Representing the different file formats with other symbols might be
a good idea (we should involve UX in that question), even if they
are quite abstracted.
I think the document icons should looks somehow like document, the
shape you choose seem also too abstract for me.
But for the present question there is one point to mention: ODF is
not eye-catching at all - in fact, you have to search a bit to find
the letters (this refers to both of your uploaded icons).
Maybe this is the idea behind this, one day the users may associate
that shape with ODF, but I have to admit that I'm a bit septic in
this aspect ;-)
For the moment, the goal with the new icons is to improve user
knowledge about ODF - that's the reason why "ODF" is so prominent on
the icons Stella designed.
These icons might fit to a more general update to OpenOffice.org -
when users know about ODF already (perhaps with OOo4?)
[...]
Even if I'm not able to design as high quality icons as you both, I
uploaded what I think might be a basis of icons that could be used
by other applications too:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:BeDipp#personal_sandbox
but these still contain the seagulls ?!
my understanding from what you've said is: ODF document icons should
have no seagulls, the app icons should have them.
Sorry, if I've not been clear enough:
I still want application related symbols on the icons - they can be
less prominent than the ODF eye-catcher, but removing them from
Stellas iconset was one of the points I disagreed (besides the loss
of file format related colors).
I nearly don't mind the application on files that stay unchanged:
Browser, viewer, player and so on. In these case the file format is
the only important information.
But if files are going to be modified, the application becomes
important to the user:
It makes really a difference if I work on an image with MS paint or
GIMP. Same with Writer or gedit on a TXT file.
And because of the different features of the ODF supporting
applications I'd like to know if a double click opens my ODT file in
Writer or any other app.
Therefore I'd liek to keep the gull (or any other OOo representing
symbol) on the document icons.
And I can imagine other applications switching easier to a general
ODF icon set, if they can add their app symbol to these icons.
And: do we really need to go with the OASIS yellow or violet ? On
that yellow I don't like either black or white letters, and the
violet color doesn't seem to work with black Letters.
Why do you need black or white on the colored area?
Why don't stay with the combination of yellow and violet?
These colors are used for representing OASIS ODF since I got notice
of ODF. They are quite unique on the desktop, and in combination they
are eye-catching.
I don't see a reason for OASIS to skip these colors (perhaps in favor
of a blue that is quite similar to the OASIS blue group), but I
didn't ask them yet.
Best regards
Bernhard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: art-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: art-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: art-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: art-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: art-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: art-h...@marketing.openoffice.org