On 22/12/2015, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 6:35 AM, john smith wrote: >> Often you see people say that the GIMP is too complicated and they are >> looking for a simpler alternative. > > Which is perfectly fine. > >> I think it would be a useful feature to have a tick box in the >> preferences >> that says "Simple Menus" and it hid all but the basic commands from the >> Menu >> Bar. > > John, I hope you will agree that complexity of software isn't solely > defined by its menu structure and menu contents. > > Users would still get tools with tons of settings to understand. And > all the filters that are preserved in the menu still have all the > settings that have to be understood as well. And the save/export > distinction will be preserved as well (which simpler apps don't > usually have). > > Simpler software for image editing _really_ means a different approach > towards building user interaction. Crippling the menu would get you > maybe just 5% out of 100% there, and most likely in the wrong > direction. > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > gimp-gui-list mailing list > gimp-gui-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-gui-list >
It is funny that you mention Save As/ Export as that was going to be my next email :) However, let's not get into that now! I have simplified all of the menus including the tools menu. The filters menu is another item that is not completely controlled by the XML though. Ideally I would remove most of them and leave just the most common ones behind. My goal is to have a version that is easy (easier?/clearer?) to use for people who are just trimming screenshots, cleaning up/rotating scanned receipts, removing red-eye etc. As long as most of the tools have useful defaults and they are named in an intuitive way, and the interface isn't full of overwhelming choices that you don't understand, I think it could become more approachable for new people. If this was a preference rather than editing XML people could gradually progress to more advanced editing. Anyway, that's my reasoning; are the items I mentioned in the original email possible with the XML or do I have to fork it and modify the source? If I do have to modify the source, which classes should I look at? Thanks John
