Jon,
Now I figured out why you're so reluctant to just make the swatches smaller as I proposed: because you used the GTK standard icon sizes for swatch sizes.
I don't think this makes a lot of sense, honestly. A swatch is not an icon at all. However, I'll leave this up to you, but in any case I just want to reiterate the need for adding one or two smaller sizes that GTK does not have. You can even make them dependent on the existing sizes, for example by making them 75% and 50% of Gtk::ICON_SIZE_MENU. But we _really_ need them, both for icons and for swatches. The current "small" size of the swatches is NOT small by any stretch of the imagination.
By the way, selecting the Huge size of the swatches in the bottom panel crashes Inkscape.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org
Jon,
Now I figured out why you're so reluctant to just make the swatches smaller as I proposed: because you used the GTK standard icon sizes for swatch sizes.
I don't think this makes a lot of sense, honestly. A swatch is not an icon at all. However, I'll leave this up to you, but in any case I just want to reiterate the need for adding one or two smaller sizes that GTK does not have. You can even make them dependent on the existing sizes, for example by making them 75% and 50% of Gtk::ICON_SIZE_MENU. But we _really_ need them, both for icons and for swatches. The current "small" size of the swatches is NOT small by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes. I agree with you completely.
I'm actually working on tuning things up now, so I'll be sure to address this in the next few weeks.
Oh, but those *are* small on my monitor when it's set to 1600x1024 :-)
By the way, selecting the Huge size of the swatches in the bottom panel crashes Inkscape.
I'll have to try to get to this with someone on Jabber. It's not happening to me on PPC, so it *might* be CPU-type related.
On 3/19/06, jon@...18... <jon@...18...> wrote:
By the way, selecting the Huge size of the swatches in the bottom panel crashes Inkscape.
I'll have to try to get to this with someone on Jabber. It's not happening to me on PPC, so it *might* be CPU-type related.
It's a division by zero when the height of huge exceeds the panel height, so the integer number of rows is correspendingly 0, and then you divide the height by that number of rows to get row height.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org
On Sunday, March 19, 2006, at 07:43 PM, bulia byak wrote:
On 3/19/06, jon@...18... <jon@...18...> wrote:
By the way, selecting the Huge size of the swatches in the bottom panel crashes Inkscape.
I'll have to try to get to this with someone on Jabber. It's not happening to me on PPC, so it *might* be CPU-type related.
It's a division by zero when the height of huge exceeds the panel height, so the integer number of rows is correspendingly 0, and then you divide the height by that number of rows to get row height.
Thank you.
That should be enough detail for me to get it fixed once I'm back in the States.
:-)
On 3/19/06, bulia byak wrote:
Now I figured out why you're so reluctant to just make the swatches smaller as I proposed: because you used the GTK standard icon sizes for swatch sizes.
I don't think this makes a lot of sense, honestly. A swatch is not an icon at all. However, I'll leave this up to you, but in any case I just want to reiterate the need for adding one or two smaller sizes that GTK does not have. You can even make them dependent on the existing sizes, for example by making them 75% and 50% of Gtk::ICON_SIZE_MENU. But we _really_ need them, both for icons and for swatches. The current "small" size of the swatches is NOT small by any stretch of the imagination.
It would be great to have smth. like this in GIMP too. Even with customized Small theme with 7pt Tahoma it's quite large.
Alexandre
participants (4)
-
unknown＠example.com -
Alexandre Prokoudine -
bulia byak -
Jon Cruz