visual impact. they have to be the same or your eyes will bleed. some days ago I pasted a link with a small explanation about (http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~matt/courses/cs563/talks/smartin/int_design.html), and there are tons of books that talk about that stuff… along with the book I recommended ("do not make me think”) this days I’m also reading “About Face, the essentials of Interaction Design”… is good lecture (a bit long) and provides good insights about UI design. Human mind decode certain things as beauty (harmony, symmetry, regularity, etc.) and others as ugly (dissonance, etc.)… if you put irregular sizes in your panels, no matter how functionally good is your tool, it will look ugly and people will see it as ugly. "It does not just have to be better, it also has to look better"
That’s why I asked Frank to at least group panels in package-class then protocol-method to see if it improves by creating a regularity, and it looks already better (but still not perfect… would be better all same size, but well… since conceptually first two panes can be grouped and last two panes too, it can pass). Esteban > On 14 Aug 2015, at 08:37, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Le 13/8/15 17:17, GitHub a écrit : >> 16181 Better unifying of the columns width in Nautilus >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/16181 > I do not see why having the exact same column width is good. > I personnally do not use long protocol names and I prefer to see > the method name. > > Stef >
