On 5/19/06, Khiraly <khiraly123@...240...> wrote:
Here is a comparison screenshot for the two design: http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/3010/spannew8ne.png
I have made some more radical modification (snap2.glade.gz) Here is the screenshot: http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/2961/snap22nq.png
Any other ideas?
While I like your of making snapping more symmetrical, I do think you have some mistakes in your grid. The things that should appear in the "from" axis are different than the things that should appear in the "to" axis. The canvas grid, for example, cannot be snapped "to" anything since the grid does not move. You also have separate entries for "nodes" and "points", even though nodes and points are the same thing.
If you go through the existing dialog carefully, the things you can snap "from" are: * Bounding boxes * Nodes
The things you can snap "to" are: * Nodes * Paths * Grid * Guides
If you put them in a grid, you get this: http://www.swansontec.com/temp/InkscapeSnapGrid.png
As others have pointed out, however, the grid is a bad usability design. Since the grid has only two columns, you can easily split it in half to form two sets of "ordinary" check boxes grouped under two headings:
http://www.swansontec.com/temp/InkscapeSnapUI.png
This design has all the logical improvements of your grid system while remaining faithful to the Gnome HIG.
The downside is the single "snap sensitivity" group. The prior system offered much more flexibility in terms of different snap sensitivities for different areas. Does anybody see this as a serious loss? I have personally never needed the extra flexibility, but others may have different experience. Bulia?
-William Swanson