On 7/28/05, Alan Horkan <horkana@...44...> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, bulia byak wrote:
On 7/28/05, Alan Horkan <horkana@...44...> wrote:
The edit menu has a massive twenty one, count 'em 21 items.
[ snip ]
[ snip ]
Vacuum Defs is still weird. I don't have all the answers but a way to "define styles" and treat defs similarly to predefined styles.
(Aside) I wouldn't know what Vacuum meant in this context. The term was once used in the Postgresql project. Something like 'Delete/Clear/Clean up unused/unneeded colours/styles/definitions/...' would be better. Perhaps not as a menu item, but an option in a 'Save As' or 'Export' dialog.
[ snip ]
"Help, About memory" is not a useful user (artist not developer user) feature should at the very least be hidden from release builds (this is what I was referring to earlier).
(Aside) I think end users quite like looking at memory usage and footprint. Most are well aware of the significance of adequate physical memory to the performance of their system as a whole and perhaps welcome the chance to monitor it for themselves; and it is evidence that the developers care about memory issues.
Rulers are ugly. Turn them off by default. Sure there is a small discoverability penalty but Inkscape is not for techincal drawing and we don't leave the grid on by default either.
(Aside) it is possible that some people want rulers (I do) and some people don't. If you really don't rulers on by default (not many of us can draw well without help) then there is a case for a preference.
The word metadata is jargon and we should not need to use it in the user interface.
Yes, but meta-data has a precise meaning, and one that is useful to people who are using SVG.
[ snip ]
having a top level select menu might help sort out some of the imbalance in the Edit menu but it may only serve to move the problems around. The tool "Edit, Find" in many ways similar to Select by ...
I agree with the two substantive points there.
1. There is a case for a Select menu. Photoshop has one, and when we use a art program we are constantly making, modifying and clearing selections. It is extremely useful to be able to go to a top level menu and see what the developers have provided for us.
2. Find is similar to Select By.
If you wanted to quickly improve/work on the Edit menu we could reasonably:
1) Move all Find/Replace operations to a separate menu; and 2) move all Select operations to a separate menu; and 3) move the XML editor to either a View, Window or Tools menu. (The XML editor button sits nicely on the toolbar, and I would even question whether it needs to be on a menu at all. I would hope that the XML editor might one day become a 'view codes'/Split screen operation. IIRC Dreamweaver either does or used to do this) .
H O W E V E R, do we really want to do anything quickly? Do we want programmers/developers pushing the user interface, or users/artists pulling it?
Personally I feel that developing the user interface is the single most important activity. Can it be done stepwise in an evolutionary way? Should we be requesting detailed mock ups? Should we release several competing designs. Few, if any, bazaar developed projects have passable user interfaces, let alone good ones, and I don't see why this should be ...
FWIW, a program that suited me perfectly would probably not be at all appealing to anyone else, and I am certainly not going to push my ideas, but I do argue against working in a vacuum. Without a clear idea of the constituency that we need to please, making changes is just going to be a waste of time.
Are we likely to identify 'user stories' - cases where users have had difficulty performing tasks owing to some feature of the design? In the present case, are people pulling down the Edit menu expecting to find 5 or 6 items, actually seeing over 20 and running away - saying that Inkscape isn't ready yet ...
I don't know ...
Ben