On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 05:31:54PM +0200, Jon Ãslund wrote: > How long did it take you to come up with the acronym VIS that fits > perfectly with ION, as in VISION? :)
I don't remember how I originally came up with the name "Ion", but some early version of Ion's homepage contained a phrase along the lines of "Ion, the first part of a vision." > The first thing I thought of was the GIMP example and how it was > wrong. I actually find it very easy to use GIMP in Ion. Just put the > different toolbars in smaller frames and the drawing canvas(es) in > bigger. This is exactly how I want to layout windows, when working on > photoshop on a Mac anyway, and here Ion helps me. But you need to do special setup for it. I prefer everything in toolbars around the window, not separate toolboxes. This is yet another reason for something like Vis. Compare Sodipodi vs. Inkscape. I prefer Inkscape's UI, although it also has broken dialogs. Those two are essentially the same program with some differences in UI and goals. > While Gnome has locked themselves into the WIMP model (maybe on > purpose, or maybe that some didn't know of any other) Considering the nature of the project, If Microsoft did something like Vis, Gnome would clone it in no time. > What is more important? To make a good interface for one model or to make > it really accessible for everyone? Both are important, and this is where the UI-specific stylesheets of Vis step in. The point is to be able to generate a reasonable, although not necessarily perfect, UI for any UI style based on the accessible descriptions and the generic stylesheet alone. However, anthe UI-specific stylesheet is most likely required for more complicated programs to perfect the UI for a particular style. Even if a stylesheet is not provided for every UI style, the program can function in such an environment and writing a fine-tuning stylesheet is much easier than porting the whole UI, or, if the program is not modularised well, all of it. -- Tuomo
