Oops, sorry Jim, I meant the compose mail interface rather than the inbox. Either way, I might have a shot at implementing ideas suggested here, as I have more time this holidays.
On 6/13/11, Jim Williams <sphere1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've nothing against icons as an option that can be toggled on/off (or > at least minimized) in order to get more real estate. I just object > to them as the initial, only, or default interface. > > (BTW -- My Gmail is all buttons and text.) > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Luke Frisken <l.fris...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think you are right in one sense. But, I look up here at a toolbar in my >> gmail and see icons that I have never clicked on and I'm pretty sure I >> know >> what they do. I'd call that self explanatory... I guess it takes a >> knowledge >> before hand of the function, or a previous encounter with a similar >> looking >> icon to be able to guess what it means. So, for a tool shelf you could use >> something that looks like a tool... Either way it can be hard to guess >> exactly what it is, even after clicking on it, or finding it in a menu and >> clicking on it; like you suggest. This is where tooltips are fantastic at >> filling in the gap between proper wiki documentation, and none at all. It >> allows people who know vaguely what they are doing to have a better guess >> at >> what the function is supposed to do. >> >> The sense in which I think you are certainly right is that the current >> menu hierarchy is the standard way of finding this functionality, and is >> something we shouldn't change, because many users rely on this to find >> what >> they need, and this is also standard behaviour in any software. This is a >> good thing I think. Buuut, the thing is, that T and the N panel are >> toggled >> on and off very frequently in my workflow (and I would guess others, >> because >> otherwise this issue wouldn't have been raised), so having as >> a separate icon in the corner, (like where the plus sign was), would help >> greatly for people who prefer to use the mouse (less clicks and mouse >> movement required), and be an even bigger improvement for people who use >> the >> tablet. Or, do we want to take the direction of favouring keyboard >> support? >> I'm not personally against that, but I know people who are better at >> remembering positions of icons than random letters on a keyboard. I think >> I >> can guess T, but what does N even stand for!? For Non-English, or English >> as >> a second language users I reckon this would be even harder, because they >> would have a harder time guessing what T stood for and associating it with >> the functionality in blender. >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Jim Williams <sphere1...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I have never found any icon scheme self-explanatory. I think >>> absolutely everything should be available through a menu hierarchy so >>> everyone, even beginners, knows that there is at least one way to find >>> anything. (I do mean everything, including text fields, checkboxes, >>> and dropdowns. It doesn't have to be a shallow hierarchy.) If you >>> have that then you can provide the hotkeys in the menu and do >>> everything with hotkeys and pop-ups too. People will look up the >>> hotkeys in the menu and learn them for anything they use a lot. If >>> you don't have everything on a menu then there will be a constant >>> stream of questions asking where and how for simple stuff. With >>> everything somewhere on a menu people will groan and hunt it down. >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Felix Schlitter >>> <felixschlit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > I couldn't agree more with Michael. Hotkeys for restoring headers, or >>> > locking them would be wonderful! >>> > >>> > And on topic: I also never use the toolshelf for anything during >>> modelling >>> > other than getting access to the operator panel. F6 is awesome but it >>> would >>> > be more convenient to have it sitting in a compact shelf (especially >>> > for >>> > complex operators like the tree generator and stuff). >>> > >>> > I like the proposal, however it would mean that the user has to learn >>> > yet >>> > another hotkey or move the mouse all the way over. Atm, I kinda like >>> > the >>> > whole N/T hotkey scenario where I press the T, which lays on the left >>> side >>> > of the keyboard (for english keyboards anyway) to hide the left sidebar >>> and >>> > vice versa. >>> > >>> > Maybe a "Maya toolshelf" could be taken into consideration, which sits >>> > on >>> > top of the screen and can also be hidden like a header. Then we could >>> > use >>> > icons instead of text in order to save space. We would just need to >>> > make >>> > sure that the icons are a bit more self explanatory than those used in >>> Maya. >>> > Then the operator would sit in the left sidebar by itself, or could get >>> > company some of the items from the right toolbar. >>> > >>> > Just an idea >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:44 PM, michael williamson < >>> > micha...@cowtoolsmedia.co.uk> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Sadly there's no key to restore a minimised header! (they're all to >>> >> easy >>> >> to close when using a tablet with no way to restore in the cycles >>> >> branch! (for headers I'd like to see the old 2.49 way and disable >>> >> minimising them....) >>> >> >>> >> ON TOPIC, >>> >> I'd prefer tool props to be its own panel.... it's too small when at >>> >> the >>> >> bottom of the toolshelf I always use F6 in preference.... >>> >> >>> >> The toolshelf itself is invaluable in paint, sculpt etc but something >>> >> I >>> >> don't use ever when modelling... the operator panel on the other hand >>> >> is >>> >> something I'd very much like to have on screen all the time when >>> >> modelling but hardly ever when painting! >>> >> >>> >> I only mention to illustrate that people are different and like >>> >> different things and a flexible UI should accommodate ;-) >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 13/06/11 10:01, M.G. Kishalmi wrote: >>> >> > I like how Brecht solved this in the cycles branch: >>> >> > he removed the (+) icons all together. >>> >> > >>> >> > there are keys for props [N] and tools [T] >>> >> > and menu entries (in view) for all 3. >>> >> > maybe we can simply add a key for tool-props? suggestion: [ALT]+[N] >>> >> > >>> >> > or maybe.. don't allow the tool-props to be hidden at all? >>> >> > just find a way to have it sit there at the top/bottom of the >>> >> > tools >>> >> nicely. >>> >> > >>> >> > cheers, >>> >> > mario >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Jonathan Smith<j.jay...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >> You are probably right, using a lot of space doesn't seem to be the >>> best >>> >> >> answer.. back to drawing board. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Jim >>> >> >> Williams<sphere1...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >>> I'd agree. Find ways to use less real estate, not more. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Aurel W.<aure...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> Hi, >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> I think that this would be rather unpractical, it takes way to >>> >> >>>> much >>> >> >>>> visual space for what it represents. If i want to collapse those >>> >> >>>> panels, i want them gone, not taking a lot of space on the screen >>> like >>> >> >>>> those huge buttons. >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> Blenders gui already got way too unefficient in 2.5, especially >>> when >>> >> >>>> it comes to, space needed for certain gui elements and panels. >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> aurel >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> On 12 June 2011 13:28, Jonathan Smith<j.jay...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>>>> I have written up a mockup/proposal on a different way to do the >>> >> closing >>> >> >>> and >>> >> >>>>> opening of the Tool Shelf and Properties Shelf UI, other than >>> using >>> >> the >>> >> >>>>> little plus icons, on my talk page. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php?title=User_talk:JayDez >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> I am, unfortunately, not a good enough coder to actually >>> >> >>>>> implement >>> >> this, >>> >> >>> so >>> >> >>>>> I'm just putting it out there as an idea, either for another >>> >> >>>>> coder >>> to >>> >> >>>>> implement, or just to promote discussion about the way this >>> >> >>>>> works, >>> >> since >>> >> >>> I >>> >> >>>>> don't think that it is done very well in the current version of >>> >> Blender. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> Any comments on or critiques of the mock up would be welcome. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> Cheers, >>> >> >>>>> Jonathan >>> >> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >>>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> >>>>> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> >>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> >>>> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> >>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> -- >>> >> >>> No essence. No permanence. No perfection. Only action. >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> >>> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> >> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >>> >> > Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> > Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Bf-committers mailing list >>> >> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Bf-committers mailing list >>> > Bf-committers@blender.org >>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> No essence. No permanence. No perfection. Only action. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> Bf-committers@blender.org >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >From Luke >> _______________________________________________ >> Bf-committers mailing list >> Bf-committers@blender.org >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> > > > > -- > No essence. No permanence. No perfection. Only action. > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > -- Sent from my mobile device >From Luke _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers