On Sep 15, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Alan Horkan wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Johan Engelen wrote:
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:52:12 +0200 From: Johan Engelen <johane@...1482...> To: inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Inkscape-devel Digest, Vol 4, Issue 17
Re: Announcing: 'tabs' in the UI for effects. (bulia byak)
Ugh. The one benefit of Script-fu with the gimp was simplicity. That had the knock on effect of keeping things reasonably consistent.
If you are going to introduce the extra complexity and inconsistency and inflict tabs in what should be a clear and simple user interface why not just go the whole hog and use python+glade to create the extension user interfaces?
Glade + this problem == Eww!!!
That's really for doing the physical part of a layout. XUL is even more so in this direction.
What we want to end up with is going the other way. Have the extensions describe their *logical* needs and let Inkscape hosting them worry about the *physical* presentation.
Hint's for grouping of the extension's data would be good. Then leave Inkscape to pick the best representation. That's what going to an approach like XForms would really help.
I worry about any effect that has so many options that it requires seperate tabs.
yeah I have issues with tabs, but they are all too often abused like they were in the old preferences dialog and offering them in this context is inviting bad design
Now this is the good concern. If we can hammer out some good "rules" for what is good use of tabs and what is not, and how to "hint" extensions to keep things moving well.