Re: GUI without X11 / Artist Help

[Jesse Ross]

On Feb 8, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Nicolas Roard wrote:

> Le 8 févr. 05, à 21:09, Olivier Migeot a écrit :
>
> > Le Mardi 8 Février 2005 21:17, jesse@jesseross.com a écrit :
> >
> > > As another direction (and maybe this is going too far or me being 
> > > more of
> > > a designer than a programmer), but would it be possible to do PNG/JPG
> > > mockups of what we'd like to see as the future direction of the GUI 
> > > (per
> > > the competition I mentioned earlier), pull the best features and 
> > > ideas,
> > > and use that as the template for building the components we would 
> > > need?
> >
> > Doing mockups before the actual thing is, IMHO, really important 
> > indeed.
>
> Yes, as much as possible, we should do mockups, that's a quite evident 
> :-)

What needs to be done to begin a UI competition? There will obviously 
have to be two competitions: one for Classic (NEXTSTEP) and one for 
Modern. There should be a clear definition of what controls need to be 
implemented, and how they will be presented. Maybe similar to the 
format used on http://www.resexcellence.com/themes/ but modified to 
take into account the GNUstep controls.

Also, a compilation of all the HIG that have been written for the 
environment should be made, and placed in a visible location on the 
website for potential UI contest designers. I'll do whatever I can to 
help manage this -- is there already someone in charge of determining 
HIG I should get in contact with?

> > Now
> > that we're talking about GNUstep look, I'd like to put a few things...
> >
> > As some of us stated before, there are some people that enjoy the 
> > current
> > GNUstep look. And there are people wanting things to change. It's very
> > unlikely that one group will manage to convince the other.
>
> Probably true, yes.

Definitely true -- same reason WinXP has a Win2000 look-alike mode.

> > So I think there
> > should be (at least) two themes bundled with GNUstep:
> >
> > * the nextish look we all now. But I don't think it should be the 
> > default one,
> > it should be more something like a "tribute to NeXT" theme.
>
> I think it should be a first-class citizen, not just a tribute..
> ie, applications should look ok with both themes.

Totally agree. Both need to comply with one set of HIG. This does lead 
to twice as much work, but there will likely be themers involved in 
pushing each side. Let's just not lead to any type of split and agree 
that each interface has its (potential) merits.

> > * some new one. And I think some discussion (and mockups, and maybe 
> > even a
> > design contest) is highly needed for this to succeed. So I'll try to 
> > throw
> > some raw ideas, do what you want with it:
> >
> > First, I think we should clearly define what is covered by a "theme". 
> > IMHO, it
> > should at least describe controls, titlebars, menus and font. 
> > Probably icons,
> > too.
>
> Ok, here I step in... Camaelon lets you redefine any widgets; at the 
> moment, a Camaelon
> theme include all the pixmaps needed to draw widgets. Including icons 
> in the theme
> works too, even if using IconKit would be better (ie, if you put the 
> icons in the theme, it will
> work; but Camaelon should use IconKit on top of that).
>
> About the fonts, it's a good idea.. but it's a bit difficult to do 
> that properly (should you bundle
> the fonts with the theme ? but in that case, you'll have a problem 
> either with xlib or art..)
>
> > Then, if we want to bring a "NEWstep" (bad pun intended) theme, we 
> > should
> > brought up some "visual identity" for GNUstep, i.e. some things that 
> > would
> > unlikely change even if we decide to change the default theme. The 
> > goal is
> > that someone seeing GNUstep on a friend's computer or - even better - 
> > in a
> > movie (let's dream a bit, will ya?) could recognize it quickly and 
> > tell "hey,
> > I know that thing, it's GNUstep, it's so cool, ...". It's more or 
> > less like a
> > brand.
>
> I entirely agree ! we can, with Camaelon, support themes. That's fine 
> and all, it will
> probably help attracting users, it will perhaps also help for 
> Windows.. but we shouldn't
> just say "choose whatever you want..". We need a good default theme. 
> At the moment
> it's the NeXT theme.
>
> The NeXT theme is *extremely* well done, but has two problems; first, 
> the gamma
> -- it needs a properly configured display. Second, it looks a bit 
> ancient.. and the icons
> we have at the moment don't really help here -- that's why we started 
> with quentin
> the icon's effort.
>
> So yes, I believe we should keep it, but we should have another theme, 
> more
> modern-looking.
> And this other theme should ideally be some kind of continuity of the 
> NeXT theme,
> not a playskool or aqua-like theme. If users wants playskool themes 
> they will have
> Camaelon anyway. But we need something that people can associate with 
> GNUstep
> (..in a *good* way ;-)

I see the relationship similar to Mac OS Platinum -> Mac OS X Brushed 
Metal. Many of the elements/widgets/components changed simply to make 
use of the advances in technology. There needs to be a clear definition 
of what makes the NEXTSTEP interface what it is: things like vertical 
menu bar, left side scroll, dock, detachable menus. Anything else that 
defines the interface that should be a must in the Modern interface? 
Anything currently there that seems extraneous or against popular 
Human-Computer Interaction Laws? With an update in interface, we should 
also look at increasing usability wherever possible.

> > Some exemple of a "visual identity", according to my personal taste, 
> > so you're
> > all free to think it's crap:
> >
> > * Grey is important. I know "outside" people are criticizing the grey 
> > touch a
> > lot, but I think it's the first thing you notice about it. "Hey, that 
> > thing
> > is  ... grey, isn't it?". Most of modern computer GUIs are using white
> > things, so it would be a nice way to "think different". And keeping 
> > grey
> > controls would allow us to make icons more important, by making them 
> > much
> > more colourful.
>
> I agree. Gray is good. Jacky users don't like that, but we don't care; 
> more people
> will prefer a readable theme (that was exactly what a guy in his 50-60 
> told me last
> year at the fosdem -- what he liked with gnustep was the clean and 
> resting look).
> Furthermore, I don't think "gray" is the problem -- just look at 
> Apple's metal UI !
> The problem is more with the widgets' shape and look than with a gray 
> tonality :-)

Grey is a good backdrop for any icon -- as long as the interface 
doesn't get dull or monotone. This can be mostly prevented with icons, 
though.

> > * The controls are maybe a bit too square, but maybe we shouldn't 
> > make them
> > round like an Apple. There should be some compromise.
>
> I think we should have more round shapes. We need a good balance.
>
> > * Different kinds of fonts may be used, like in a typed text: "sans 
> > serif"
> > fonts for captions, "serif" ones for longer text, and fixed weight 
> > one for
> > console text (for example).
>
> well, that's already easily doable (just play with Preferences.app), 
> it's more
> a question of fonts availability and standard defaults..
>
> > Those were just examples, but I really think we should build some set 
> > of rules
> > like this.
> >
> > Just a last word about the fonts: I think a theme should be bound to 
> > a set of
> > font. The Vera set may be the best fit, since it high quality and 
> > opensource
> > compliant. But I'm not sure whether it's providing asian character 
> > sets,
> > which can be a problem for a "default" font.
>
> Well, it's not easy to bind a font with a theme... GNUstep works with 
> the PostScript
> name, not the font by itself.. I don't know..
>
> thanks,
>
> --
> Nicolas Roard
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
>  -Arthur C. Clarke
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep