Cedric Sodhi wrote:
> I'd like to bring up an idea that does not seem too difficult to
> implement and that should replace the unusuable slider widgets for,
> brush size. If you are okay with that, I might implement it.
> The sliders are virtually useless because they cover a fixed range
> 0 to <insert big value here> without any intelligent behaviour. For
> brush size, for example, that means you can at best alter the brush
> in 20px steps with a reasonably big toolbox.
I think I have something there for us that is more straightforward:
two things actually:
#1 is what I got the Krita guys to implement during a sprint of theirs
that I attended, it was based on my work on #2 actually. It works for
long sliders in dialog boxes, not for our tool options panels.
say you got a slider going from 1 to 1000. then divide the slider
range (in pixels) in 3 equal parts, so that each handles a decade:
|-- 1–10 --|-- 10–100 --|-- 100–1000 --|
within each third the increase/decrease of value is linear.
the Krita guys love this system (hardcore tablet users, btw),
but as I said: only for long sliders.
#2 is where I developed the whole idea. I was working on
tool options widgets that would allow the whole tool options
dockable to be exactly 2 toolbox icons wide (normal icon size,
the need for the small theme goes away a.f.a.t. toolbox is concerned):
top to bottom those are are 1 popup selection list, 4 sliders
and two 'checkboxes' (on/off switches), in real 1-to-1 size.
yes, cut off texts are shown fully on mouse-over: this is GIMP
and usage is trained, so position; (part) identification and
feedback (could better on the checkbox, I see now) are what
you can see here where the current experimental sliders
in git come from. Krite did their #1 sliders in this form,
but not the following:
so how are these tiny sliders going to work? well click the
mouse button down on the slider (not on the number) and
this pops up:
with the current value right under the mouse position,
so releasing in panic does not change the slider value.
moving vertically you switch decades, horizontally everything
is linear within a decade. one could easily add decades, having
a range factor of a million for instance (e.g. 0.01–10000) when
that is needed.
grocking is simple, motions (up/down, left/right) are linear,
feedback always there. is there a flaw? yes: popping up at the
screen's edge, and wanting the 'value right under the mouse'
founder + principal interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://blog.mmiworks.net: on interaction architecture
Gimp-developer mailing list