Il giorno dom, 15/08/2010 alle 01.32 +0800, PCMan ha scritto: > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Alessandro Pellizzari <[email protected]> wrote: > > Il giorno ven, 13/08/2010 alle 22.51 +0800, PCMan ha scritto: > > > >> If you sort items by name, how should a item with custom position behave? > > > > Reset positions, as Andrea said. > This can be annoying if, for example, you want to keep Trash Can at > the right lower corner and sort others only.
The Trashcan would have "right" and "bottom" instead of "top" and "left", so it will always fit on the screen. :) > >> If you have a newly added item, where should it be placed? > > > > In the first free spot. You should define square spots and check the > > first completely free. > This doesn't work when you have too many files on the desktop. > In addition, if you freely place the items at arbitrary position, > there is no "free slot". Then place them upper left, and the user will reposition them wherever he wants. If its desktop is crowded he will know the icons will overlap someday. > I don't agree. In this way you loss all the placement if you login > with a different screen size. Having right and bottom relative placement mitigates this. And even percent-based, see below. The true question is: how does the user visually see he is going to position relative to right and bottom? Maybe we could think of "hotspots" on the 4 screen edges. The user drags the icon on one of those hotspots, then continues dragging it to the final position. The icon will be relative to the visited hotspot. A (semitransparent) line could connect the hotspot to the icon while dragging, so the user knows which hotspot it is relative to, and the positions could be all percent-based, so all the icons will remain onscreen even when resizing screen. > Even worse, if you change the size of > desktop panel, this affect the size of working area. So you loss the > placement of all icons. The panel size would change only a small portion of the screen, so a few icons would be affected. The others would remain in their places. But again: using percent-based positions would avoid the problem. The size also could be percent-based, so the icon would never overlap, but simply get smaller or bigger if you resize the screen. This would be great for svg icons, but could ruin pixel-based ones. > No, if you use larger font, fixed size and position will make the icon > text totally unreadable. I don't think I understand correctly. The text should not be as large as the icon, but expand left and right, so just define "how much left and right" (for example, the icon is 64x64 pixels, the text could be 192 pixels large (64+64+64) and 64 pixels high. Everithing exceeding that would get cropped and ellipsized. Hovering the icon could show the whole text if it got cropped. This way you know that if your "typical icon" is 64x64, your slots would be 192x128, to accomodate the icon and the text below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Lxde-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list
