From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: chad Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix placement of toggle and radio button in Lucid menu. Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 13:35:45 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87sfs87i5o.fsf@elite.giraud> <87pmnc7f5c.fsf@yahoo.com> <87k0dk7ejd.fsf@yahoo.com> <878rtzb3hr.fsf@elite.giraud> <83h78nqguu.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnhj152u.fsf@elite.giraud> <83a6efqepd.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnhjdmxe.fsf@elite.giraud> <831qzrq9j0.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkyvdkif.fsf@elite.giraud> <83y21yq4zj.fsf@gnu.org> <87h78m5vfg.fsf@yahoo.com> <83sfs6p2ie.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfs63ws4.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ee3nz8ea.fsf@elite.giraud> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bc7b8605d9185143" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5486"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: EMACS development team Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 28 19:37:19 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nOktb-0001Hm-Bp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 19:37:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48136 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nOkta-00059w-8M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 13:37:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53260) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nOksP-0003tn-12 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 13:36:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [2a00:1450:4864:20::130] (port=42569 helo=mail-lf1-x130.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nOksN-000416-Hl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 13:36:04 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id t13so10915052lfd.9 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 10:35:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=EMxxFiMskQQtcbqOo/m12wapq7JgeOEFGM4ZrAxAVao=; b=GP11YD9xwL9nyK06oF+pctO769Pi100rAtJsck2IhbuwhxqWE49a4pfRmGPcd/8SDt LMuAgzkhkEXEzZk+xgp61D+6UOu5L3ruc6rW9V5uu1f9RiENAl23MkIGU8gIPEX68rua lPw5BulFzBxjbZ76HpgZ8SzsJt6p7OmfL98QlP8+pFIqwMKIdD/4jHybYU1AgVyfwmsR g3ARvEcKzxMEb2CkgKaRpFoOjTEJjt7pkPHIR5xGIi2Wfcc1kCN63pgZaTqqAISiCwkn RshCAym16iLo2gDW1jB7BDiiTKUOEvioownYeBJ7LWoTJMcWezllzoNTG+shGKfy4xC1 KD4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=EMxxFiMskQQtcbqOo/m12wapq7JgeOEFGM4ZrAxAVao=; b=URv+hEIb4rDhfRSkiptupLDOlnJa/KvBEOw4JopEWpqmHzGYPuYf9mxMCpjjeA5the DswbNYSX8N32wmqFKZClfjNqr32Z8tYczqbLZS0TmXUJyx4SDbVJrF3JWhzeo1BoDwld xtmV3waXe6X3bOR/cqg4EdwuBMeSCM7ycMeP743UdWpJ8CeMBUXFWC23zenOZ2RhkjXH DAQvBL0W9ihM9KUEzrs7ksEXekS7MfejClENvQPg8+XAeWB4hOv7MxqOW6EyyOOfasX2 C3Cg+A8GsTCX2BHGBGSryAmBaS8CzWzFt4ALJI24jfUYzcQBAk0+762S2F7F8iyjQCKp IkUw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Z5KMGDSZKltCWyT+42dEJwG79+FtVUmabOIiNwtdu/+u9r4XU 0TpzK84DP0MncP1nKnSV1Or+/bb4r5G+gvIHMvuQY0vt X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwh6/Os8hyQ8jsRug6PklbRqloUq1Y1FsUYVCsl5gJacdubuTcdEkZeUv/HXnpTclEf0K1tXoR+7X8mdN7SSyY= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:54ba:0:b0:443:3ca9:f9f5 with SMTP id w26-20020ac254ba000000b004433ca9f9f5mr13213267lfk.256.1646073357301; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 10:35:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87ee3nz8ea.fsf@elite.giraud> X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2a00:1450:4864:20::130 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::130; envelope-from=yandros@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x130.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, PDS_HP_HELO_NORDNS=0.659, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:286732 Archived-At: --000000000000bc7b8605d9185143 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:47 AM Manuel Giraud wrote: > But I still find it to be high regarding the text label. I have tested > with other fonts with the same result because the capital letters were > always shorter than the full ascent of a font. > FWIW, I put this in front of a friend who used to do UI design, and they said, roughly "you can try to get fancy with centering checkboxes on font metrics, but most people actually like "a few pixels above the baseline", as long as you don't go above the top line. Part of why this works is due to the fact that very few fonts have capital letters with descenders, so visually, you almost always get white space below the adjacent letter. If you want to get fancy, you can compute "a few" as something like '(floor (/ font-size) 4)', but most designers can find a fixed value that works the vast majority of the time". Tying this in with Eli's suggestion, this could be a configurable value, defaulting to, say, 3 or some divisor of the font size. Hope that helps, ~Chad --000000000000bc7b8605d9185143 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:47 AM Manuel Gi= raud <manuel@ledu-giraud.fr= > wrote:
But = I still find it to be high regarding the text label. I have tested
with other fonts with the same result because the capital letters were
always shorter than the full ascent of a font.

FWIW, I put this in front of a friend who used to do UI design, and= they said, roughly "you can try to get fancy with centering checkboxe= s on font metrics, but most people actually like "a few pixels above t= he baseline", as long as you don't go above the top line. Part of = why this works is due to the fact that very few fonts have capital letters = with descenders, so visually, you almost always get white space below the a= djacent letter. If you want to get fancy, you can compute "a few"= as something like '(floor (/ font-size) 4)', but most designers ca= n find a fixed value that works the vast majority of the time". Tying = this in with Eli's suggestion, this could be a configurable value, defa= ulting to, say, 3 or some divisor of the font size.

Hope that helps,
~Chad

--000000000000bc7b8605d9185143--