Re: gtk-devel-list Digest, Vol 52, Issue 27
> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 09:55:37 +0200 > From: Thorsten Wilms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Gtk+ Font dialog proposal > > It's very unfortunate that you can't filter for serif/sans and so on. > The Monospaced only checkbox means there's no variable-width only. I > think a "Show:" with a Fixed-width and a Variable-width checkbox would > be better. You're right, the terms Fixed-width and Variable-width are better. > Moving the size entry to below the list seems like a good idea for the > reason you give: the pre-defined sizes are likely more often used. Yep. Also, makes for a better click-target, being larger and keeping the lists top aligned. > Preview area on the top seems backwards to me. It's not the sovereign > but the subject! It's the only place were I could place a vertical sliding pane without breaking the rest of dialog - collapsing the pane to the top is natural, instead of collapsing it to the bottom, were it will be *between* the lists and dialog buttons, very awkward drag and slide. > Using the font name and properties as preview text is > worse than using abcde... . Something along the lines of lorem ipsum or > the quick brown fox with numbers and special characters would be better. The problem here is that "Quick brown fox..." doesn't make sense in any language. "Lorem ipsum..." also doesn't make sense for someone who doesn't know it's a dummy text. A common user would just popup the dialog and say "What means that? I can't read !". Some users might even get offended. So I tough using the font name and size is random enough to provide a preview with glyphs, spacing and numerals; is a short text; makes sense inside the context; makes sense for international users; is visually informative, as displays meta-information (the font you selected in the font itself). Do you know any case were displaying with the font name would be a problem? > Having the text editable and allowing to switch between alternatives wouldn't > hurt. Yes, making editable is better - I just didn't found a consistent way to use a text entry that behaves like the label. > You might find http://eyegene.ophthy.med.umich.edu/unicode/fontdialog/ > interesting. I already saw that ;) Thanks for the reply! ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: gtk-devel-list Digest, Vol 52, Issue 27
Hi, On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 13:54 -0300, Henrique Carvalho Alves wrote: > The problem here is that "Quick brown fox..." doesn't make sense in > any language. "Lorem ipsum..." also doesn't make sense for someone who > doesn't know it's a dummy text. A common user would just popup the > dialog and say "What means that? I can't read > !". Some users might even get offended. > > So I tough using the font name and size is random enough to provide a > preview with glyphs, spacing and numerals; is a short text; makes > sense inside the context; makes sense for international users; is > visually informative, as displays meta-information (the font you > selected in the font itself). Do you know any case were displaying > with the font name would be a problem? Imagine you are working in a western locale and selecting a font to write text in arabic. The font you are looking for does most likely not even provide the glyphs to render its name (as the font name will be shown in your current locale). Another example is a symbol font. It typically doesn't include any letters. Using the font name for preview does not work. You could try to add some heuristics that select a reasonable text depending on font coverage. But that is likely going to fail in some corner cases. So whatever you end up doing, you should give the user a way to change the text used for preview. Sven ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: gtk-devel-list Digest, Vol 52, Issue 27
2008/8/17 Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> The problem here is that "Quick brown fox..." doesn't make sense in >> any language. "Lorem ipsum..." also doesn't make sense for someone who >> doesn't know it's a dummy text. A common user would just popup the >> dialog and say "What means that? I can't read >> !". Some users might even get offended. >> >> So I tough using the font name and size is random enough to provide a >> preview with glyphs, spacing and numerals; is a short text; makes >> sense inside the context; makes sense for international users; is >> visually informative, as displays meta-information (the font you >> selected in the font itself). Do you know any case were displaying >> with the font name would be a problem? > > Imagine you are working in a western locale and selecting a font to > write text in arabic. The font you are looking for does most likely not > even provide the glyphs to render its name (as the font name will be > shown in your current locale). > > Another example is a symbol font. It typically doesn't include any > letters. > > Using the font name for preview does not work. You could try to add some > heuristics that select a reasonable text depending on font coverage. But > that is likely going to fail in some corner cases. So whatever you end > up doing, you should give the user a way to change the text used for > preview. > > Sven > You're right. The current font dialog also fails for that (see Ubuntu, which ships some fonts for other languages, and the preview just presents a default "abcdABCDE" text in sans). I too guess finding the glyph coverage for the font is hard and not reliable. As stated on the last reply, making the preview editable is better, of course. The question here: is using the font name and size as preview text a better default? ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: gtk-devel-list Digest, Vol 52, Issue 27
2008/8/17 Henrique Carvalho Alves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2008/8/17 Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> The problem here is that "Quick brown fox..." doesn't make sense in >>> any language. "Lorem ipsum..." also doesn't make sense for someone who >>> doesn't know it's a dummy text. A common user would just popup the >>> dialog and say "What means that? I can't read >>> !". Some users might even get offended. >>> >>> So I tough using the font name and size is random enough to provide a >>> preview with glyphs, spacing and numerals; is a short text; makes >>> sense inside the context; makes sense for international users; is >>> visually informative, as displays meta-information (the font you >>> selected in the font itself). Do you know any case were displaying >>> with the font name would be a problem? >> >> Imagine you are working in a western locale and selecting a font to >> write text in arabic. The font you are looking for does most likely not >> even provide the glyphs to render its name (as the font name will be >> shown in your current locale). >> >> Another example is a symbol font. It typically doesn't include any >> letters. >> >> Using the font name for preview does not work. You could try to add some >> heuristics that select a reasonable text depending on font coverage. But >> that is likely going to fail in some corner cases. So whatever you end >> up doing, you should give the user a way to change the text used for >> preview. >> >> Sven >> > > You're right. The current font dialog also fails for that (see Ubuntu, > which ships some fonts for other languages, and the preview just > presents a default "abcdABCDE" text in sans). I too guess finding the > glyph coverage for the font is hard and not reliable. As stated on the > last reply, making the preview editable is better, of course. The > question here: is using the font name and size as preview text a > better default? > Second try, based on feedback gathered here: http://hcalves.com/media/files/fontselector2.tar.gz Full history, details and screenshots: http://hcalves.com/blog/2008/08/17/font-dialog-proposal-gtk/ ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
