On May 11, 2009, at 09:12:51, [email protected] wrote: > The idea is about how fast notifications are moving, and this time > however whatever the distance a notification have to move it'll take > let's say one second, always.
That's way too long. As I remember, the old window-moving animation was one second itself. I'd recommend slashing it to about 1/10 of a second. > When there are notifications about to disappear in half a second (or > less) next to a notification that's just disappeared, Growl would > know that and wait for an extra 0,5 seconds, and if there's a > notification next to this one again which is going to disappear in > 0,5 (or less), then 0,5 seconds more. I would recommend moving the animation up, not putting it off. Ideally, Growl should be somewhat loose about moving notification windows into places that other notification windows are still vacating. How loose is a function of what kind of animation the display uses. Most displays fade in and out; I'd recommend about half the fade time as the threshold (i.e., if one of its windows is halfway faded out, it's clear to move another window into its space). A multiple-window display that slid in from the edge would have a threshold of zero—as soon as it starts sliding out of view, a subsequent window can move into its place. The problem is that all of that is really hard. Most of the rest of what you wrote sounds about right; it's what Growl used to do/is supposed to be doing. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Growl Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
