[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: suggestions on toolbar icons
From: |
Jan D. |
Subject: |
Re: suggestions on toolbar icons |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:52:40 +0100 |
OPEN is what the action is, not FILE. Sometimes (without file
dialog or
the
Motif dialog), you can actually open directories with open. So
FILE
does not apply.
Yes, despite the name, `find-file-existing' can also open directories.
I
still think the folder icon is misleading here.
You should try to influence Gnome then.
It is not FILE, it is NEW we are using. And should be using, as
the
action is NEW as in new buffer, not FILE. Again, it is possible to
make a new buffer without any file with this under the right
settings.
Fine. How would I know which you use, without checking the code? FILE
and
NEW are _identical_ icons; they are both standard file icons.
Why should you know? The tooltip tells you what it does, that is all
any user wants to know.
So, what is FILE for? Is it perhaps for opening an existing file? It is
normal that the two actions "open a new file" and "open an existing
file"
have similar icons - that's just what I was suggesting we need.
Similar,
yes; identical, no. File, yes (for both); folder, no.
Also a Gnome issue, take it up there.
if you are going to use GNOME as a litmus test, then why not
be consistent and use GTK_STOCK_GOTO_TOP instead of GTK_STOCK_HOME for
Info's Top? Likewise, why not use GTK_STOCK_GO_BACK for Back (which
is,
presumably, chronological) - as in Web browsers? Why use the GNOME
undo/redo icon (GTK_STOCK_REDO) for Back and Forward?
HOME was used because previous Emacs versions use HOME from GTK
1.x.
Legacy.
BACK is used in info, I presume that is what you mean. Are you
suggesting BACK for two actions?
I said "why not use GTK_STOCK_GO_BACK for Back (which is, presumably,
chronological)." It is used in Info for Previous, not for
chronological
Back. I already pointed out that it is _not_ good to use undo/redo for
chronological moves.
The previous version of Emacs used redo/undo, so we keep that.
Legacy. Are we tied to legacy as well as to GNOME? And if (as is the
case
here) they happen to conflict? Apparently legacy wins.
Yes, we are slightly tied to legacy, but less so in this part than for
the rest part of Emacs. Sure, we can use BACK for something else, but
present a suggestion for a complete and visually consistent toolbar,
questioning random icons here and there is not constructive.
To be clear: _IF_ we are to be consistent in adherence to GNOME, then
we
should 1) use BACK/FORWARD for Back/Forward (chronological moves), 2)
use
something else (not BACK/FORWARD and not UNDO/REDO) for structural
moves,
and 3) use TOP (not HOME) for Top. Hang legacy, for things like toolbar
icons!
Again, present a complete suggestion. You are assuming somebody else
should figure out what this "something else" is. That is not going to
happen, there are far more important things to work on.
the international exit sign.
Make that icon, so we can see what it looks like.
Attached (google for "exit"). Also attached: the information symbol
(google
for "information"). Even countries that don't use international signs
use
these two in airplanes, airports, and such, so I can't imagine many
people
haven't seen them. Also attached: possibilities I mentioned for
"Preferences" (Customize) and "New File".
These are visually inconsistent with the rest of the toolbar, except
perhaps for new.gif. I don't see any advantage over the Gnome
versions. However, you can try getting these in to Gnome. But you
probably have to modify them so they are visually consistent with other
Gnome icons.
"Quit" is clearer (and more common) than "discard". At this level, the
distinction between leaving the buffer intact and killing it is not
important - and "discard" doesn't help with this distinction anyway.
It is very important. It is a great difference between just
burying a
buffer and discarding it.
Of course, but it is not a difference that is reflected in "discard"
any
more than in "quit". If you really want to be a stickler about this,
use
"delete". The point is that "discard" is as ambiguous as "quit", but
it is
less familiar to many people.
I have not done any statistical analysis of how familiar people are
with discard, but the Emacs manual uses it in several instances
(discard input, lines, etc), and the meaning is never quit. Of course
the difference is reflected in the difference between discard and quit.
I'll let the native english speakers descide if discard is so strange
that a change to delete is needed.
Jan D.
- suggestions on toolbar icons, Drew Adams, 2005/03/16
- RE: suggestions on toolbar icons, Drew Adams, 2005/03/17
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, Jan D., 2005/03/17
- RE: suggestions on toolbar icons, Drew Adams, 2005/03/17
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons,
Jan D. <=
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, David Kastrup, 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, Jan D., 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, David Kastrup, 2005/03/18
- RE: suggestions on toolbar icons, Drew Adams, 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, Jan D., 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, David Kastrup, 2005/03/17
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, Miles Bader, 2005/03/17
- RE: suggestions on toolbar icons, Drew Adams, 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, David Kastrup, 2005/03/18
- Re: suggestions on toolbar icons, Richard Stallman, 2005/03/18