On Apr 8, 2009, at 7:59 PM, Jody Garnett wrote: >> <snip /> > >> I also do not mind the level of collaboration; I would like to make >> sure that we use the same visual metaphor (even if we need to produce >> a different image due to intended use). >> >> Could you explain what you mean here? > > Sure; right now you have: > - http://projects.opengeo.org/geosilk/export/1/trunk/geosilk/ > vector.png > > And vector database: > - > http://projects.opengeo.org/geosilk/export/1/trunk/geosilk/database_vector.png > > And vector server (ie wfs): > - http://projects.opengeo.org/geosilk/export/1/trunk/geosilk/server_vector.png > > The vector server combines the image of a silk/vector.png and the > image of silk/server.png. These two images are visual metaphors; which > you combine to when creating other icons. > > Looking at the eclipse guidelines they call this "core icon concepts > now" - their explaination is better than mine. > > So a really "easy" level of collaboration is to link our two pages; > and make sure we have similar "core icon concepts"; I am under some > restrictions on modifiers/overlays (like add and delete) in your > example - but there is no reason we cannot keep the same visual ideas > going. Adding a link to your page now.
Sounds great to me. My hope is that by keeping the same core concepts people will be able to move between OpenGeo / GeoExt apps and things like uDig without needing to relearn the visual language. I added an icon for repository today and made a table similar to your "Standard Eclipse Metaphors". Are there any other core concepts that you think need to be addressed? >> I hope these ideas are useful? Do you have a wiki page on geosilk to >> take notes etc? >> >> Just made it: http://projects.opengeo.org/geosilk/ > > Nice presentation; and you document the naming convention - just what > was needed. > > A couple bits of feedback; I try and be very strict on the 16x16 icons > so they can be told appart. Looking at your page on my screen from > four feet away I find the following: > - the map/add map / delete map icons really look like they are crossed > out; the "\" shape is all the eye can picks up on. > - I see how you based the map on the slik "picture" > - Looking closely I now see the "\" line is a road; and the "+" and > "-" symbols mask the second road making the result look like a "\" - > if you the second road higher the modifier will not interfear > - the add/delete modifiers are too similar to tell apart at that > distance (they both end up round and I am color blind); one of the > reasons a green "+" and a red "x" is used on the udig side. I see that > you get these from silk so their is not much to be done. Yeah, I like how the Eclipse guidelines use position in addition to color to get around the colorblindness issues. Unfortunately Silk doesn't do a similar thing. :( —R ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
