RE: [Bug-gnubg] Icon in the new GUI layout.

[Albert Silver]

> So, what about the Hide/Show Panel button? First of all should I call
the
> right hand widget, with the game record and annotation window for the
> "panel", is that a good term? What image should I use for the button
to
> hide and show the panel? (I'm now using a image of a microphone.
Logic?) I
> also guess that I will use a lightbulb for the Hint button. A good
icon
> image?

I realize I can go scouring for the standard GNOME pics (works for me
since I use GNOME in my Linux -- my internet-connected Linux BTW -- Thx
guys), but could you just group them in a pic with the labels/purposes
you plan for them?

> Here's another opinion as well: I think the button tools in the
annotation
> window, with the text "Eval", "...", 0 1 2 3 4 and so, are to small*,
so I
> was thinking of using icon images on these buttons as well. 

A picture for the ply-depth buttons? I must admit it never crossed my
mind to find an icon for a 2 or a 3. Hmm... How can one represent a ply
pictorially after all? 1 balloon, 2 balloons... :-)

Well.... what
> should be the image for the eval button? What about the image for the
> rollout button? What should be the image for the MWC button? (I'm
> designing
> a image for "Move") What should be the image for the Show button? (An
eye,
> maybe?)

Just two things which are not unimportant in my opinion:

- I think the Move button should be removed. I think it is superfluous.
I have never found a single instance where I might consider using it.
Seeing a move is done with the Show button and that's fine, but a Move
button? If I really want to play one of the analyzed moves my instinct
has always been to do it myself. I have seen some friends who are now
power-users of gnubg and thus highlight a number of interesting issues.
This is one they have agreed upon.

- I'd be careful about replacing some things such as the ply-numbers by
icons. The reason is that 1, 2, 3, etc. require no further explanation
other than they represent 1 ply, 2 plies, etc. If you replace them with
an icon whose function is not *immediately* obvious it will cause
problems of usage. It isn't even enough to create logical images, as
sometimes that logic is correct, but requires a user to be thinking
along the same lines, and if they don't they'll get blocked. Here's an
example from experience: 

Chess Assistant, a program whose GUI I worked on for several years, had
exactly such problems and it was the source of comments at live
demonstrations/explanations as well as e-mails. You see, users could
easily turn on a chess engine (the term used instead of 'bot' in chess)
to see the analysis of the current position on the board. However, it
required clicking on an eye stuck in the middle of a computer screen.
Why? The logic was this: the action of having an engine on overviewing
the moves as they appeared was called 'to monitor' the games, thus they
had a monitor picture, but to be extra sure users understood, they added
an eye also. The result was that NO ONE understood it, although they did
learn it of course having no choice. Believe it or not, I never got them
to change this, and was still arguing 3 years later to at least add
labels under their icons. Mind you it isn't always so, but one must be
careful.

> 
> -Øystein
> 
> * To small: You really have to aim with the mouse to hit these
buttons.
> The
> access time to click on a button is clearly a function of the target
size
> and the target distance. I think the distance is ok, but the size of
these
> buttons are simply to small to be as effective as possible.

One thing that might be possible, and is likely easy to implement, would
be to add an explanation as to what the program is doing when analyzing
deeper plies that take time. Of course a user should know what it is
they are doing when they click 3-ply, but sometimes they may not, or
they may be wondering whetehr the program crashed because of the time it
is taking. So when pressing 3-ply, why not have it add a message in the
status bar below saying it is running a 3-ply search? 

                                                        Albert