On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Markus Neteler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Vaclav Petras <[email protected]> wrote: > > The > > gray in the background of the image is the one of the window done using > > transparency so it should always match with the window. Unfortunately, this > > will fail miserably when somebody has dark window background color or green > > one (text or logo will be invisible).
> If technically possible as a test if the window background is dark and > if yes, replace transparency with some white? That's good idea which actually could work quite smoothly. On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Markus Neteler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Vaclav Petras <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would also like to change some terms used in the startup window. Namely, > > avoid using ambiguous word "project". If it is not clear, use "GRASS > > location", otherwise just "location". Same for mapset. We should also let > > the translators know that location and mapset should not be translated, or > > translated very carefully. > > The "project" has been introduced in the past to de-confuse user > coming from "other" GIS. > "Location" alone is not quite clear I fear. I see the motivation but random rename of one thing at one place is just adding to confusion. If we need explanation, then we need something like explanation in some less prominent color, similarly to what is in GUI elsewhere (see attachment). Broad rename is out of question I guess. Project is very ambiguous, it is location, mapset or GUI workspace? For me project is usually mapset, sometimes in combination with GUI workspace and this how I explain that to people. For non-GIS people, seeing project and projection without further explanation might be also quite challenging. These details could be included in the less visible text or in the message box/area I was suggesting earlier. On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Newcomb, Doug <[email protected]> wrote: > > Would location directory be clearer than just location? > It could be just my English but "location directory" sounds very similar to "directory of location" or "location's directory". If something then I currently see GRASS location and GRASS mapset as the only option. Moreover, you have already GIS Data Directory, which is actually (GRASS) GIS database already. Using directories and files in terminology is dangerous, there is also written that mapset is a directory with GIS files. Leaving aside what GIS file could be, this creates impression that mapset is just a directory with some files which you can manipulate directly. As a result people who actually read the stuff, move around the content of mapset manually, break the mapset, and are surprised that GRASS cannot open the individual files ("GIS files") from file manger. Location and mapset have nature of a database then directories, ESRI File GeoDatabase (or whatever is the name) is basically what GRASS location and mapset is. Location and mapset being sort of database storage of course nicely messes with GISDBASE being database at least by name. Vaclav
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
