On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 22:08 +0100, peter sikking wrote:
> Michael Grosberg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 20:58 +0100, peter sikking wrote:
> >> check it out when you have the chance.
> >
> > Where can one see the new spec?
> same old place:
> <http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/No_image_open_specification>
> but I actually meant check out the software...
Difficult since it's not being built daily as far as I know.

> > To give my $0.02, I think Gimp should simply emulate what is out  
> > there,
> > namely the behavior of established applications such as Open Office  
> > and
> > gedit.
> I am really struggling to say something nice here... ah:
> The perfect family car was invented ages ago: the volkwagen beetle.
> That did not stop designer from creating totally different cars for
> different needs. And customers from actually buying better cars.
No reason to design a joystick-steered three wheeled car just to be
different! Predictability of the UI is a very powerful tool and should
not be dismissed. Applications don't work in a vacuum: they are used
along with other applications, and asking users to "switch mental gears"
when they switch from one app to another for no reason is not a good
thing. The developers of those apps have struggled long with exactly the
same problems Gimp is trying to solve and have come up with good

Case in point: in your specification you state that the application will
quit if:
"Close in the File menu is invoked and the no image’ window is shown"
While usually in such cases the close command is grayed out and only the
quit command is available. What good reason do you have to change that?

The idea of a window with no document in it is already established. You
yourself said "no gimmicks" and yet in the design there's a cute looking
wilber in the window's background, which is nice but really, you think
without it users won't know what this window is? give users some credit!
it's a gimmick and by your own rules should be removed.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to