From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: suggestions on toolbar icons Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:36:27 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1111131482 21136 80.91.229.2 (18 Mar 2005 07:38:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:38:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel Devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 18 08:38:02 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DCC2v-0001XK-EV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:37:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DCCJM-0007Ra-Ty for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:54:25 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DCCJ4-0007OA-PJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:54:06 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DCCJ2-0007NN-Nu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:54:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DCCJ2-0007Mm-He for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:54:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DCC27-0003vR-C2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:36:35 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DCC24-0001DA-RI; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 02:36:33 -0500 Original-To: "Jan D." In-Reply-To: (Jan D.'s message of "Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:52:40 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34707 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34707 "Jan D." writes: >> 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. Please, Jan, when replying to Outlook users, use the WYf command from gnus on their article. This is not readable. >> 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. Disagree. Tooltips are optional guides. The user interface has to make sense of its own without explanation, or we could just make everything carry identical buttons. Tooltips are nice for giving out some rationale, so that the user then can say "ah right, that was the logic behind it". But they are an explanation, not a substitute for reason. >> The previous version of Emacs used redo/undo, so we keep that. >> >> Legacy. Are we tied to legacy as well as to GNOME? I have to agree here with Drew. "legacy" here is an explanation why something happens to be the way it is right now, not a reason why it should be kept that way. > Yes, we are slightly tied to legacy, but less so in this part than > for the rest part of Emacs. I don't see we are tied at all by legacy. Emacs-21.4 had a working toolbar just on a single platform, and then it did not use GNOME-2 icons. There is absolutely no reason to invoke "legacy" here. We have significantly reordered the menus which is a much larger step than using appropriate icons. Drew's criticism was probably worded stronger than necessary, and so you felt the need to get defensive. There is no need either to be ashamed of what we did previously, nor to cling to it without necessity. You have expressed your view that it is a good idea to go with the flow of GNOME in general with regard to the icons, and I agree with that. Drew's suggestions in that context make sense, even when they were worded in an unfortunate way. It is not like I don't have a history of that affliction myself... > 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. Yes, I think that would be a good idea. Obviously Drew has invested some thoughts in it, and it would be nice if this lead to a coherent proposal we could then implement. And with a coherent proposal, it is also easier to explain to the GNOME artists why and what new and changed icons would be desirable and for what reason. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum