[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GNUstep Icons Effort : you can help !
From: |
Quentin Mathé |
Subject: |
Re: GNUstep Icons Effort : you can help ! |
Date: |
Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:48:20 +0200 |
Le 24 oct. 04, à 04:03, Banlu Kemiyatorn a écrit :
Hi,
Hi
- I think the icon guideline isn't clear about the angle of the
isometric
icons from the base. It would be nice if you can state the angle value.
Icons would look more nice with the same angle when they are
sitting together imho. In garma's lapis prototype, I'm going 28 degree.
Well, basically pure isometric view is based on a 45 degree value… but
I must said that variations will probably be tried when the icons look
and feel will sketched. A view a bit more frontal with less space for
the top is a possibility.
- And the issue of isometric vs. oblique view. I can't agree with the
isometric view because it waste more space at the corners.
ie. oblique may have less clickable area than isometric.
/\
|\/|
\/
vs.
__
/_/|
|_|/
(hope they look right there)
I'm not sure about that and I must said I don't really like the oblique
view, but anyway the clickable area is not a problem because we are not
going to use for the icons a hit test based on their alpha channel (we
recommend in the guidelines to use the square area which encloses the
icon as the the clickable area).
I tend to have more concern with the usability
Are you inducing we haven't enough concern with usability ? ;-)
so I think I'll go in
different direction for garma. Unless someone prove me wrong.
(math thing, I may not calculate the area correctly, I can't even
multiply 9 x 8 -- 73 right?)
In my opinion, it's 72, but that just my opinion…
- Another point is, Jasper's icons look so great and it could be
a hard time for me and anyone to play caching up with ;-)
That's nice to hear… :-)
Quentin.
--
Quentin Mathé
qmathe@club-internet.fr
Re: GNUstep Icons Effort : you can help !, Gregory John Casamento, 2004/10/24