I tried to avoid a lengthy mail, but now I need to explain. UI design should be approached with the same rigor as system design. A community is better than an individual in producing solutions, but only when the effort is in concert under a shared vision. If the arguments are just about "I like this better", the process transforms into a design by committee which usually leads to poor results. So, let me share my "vision".
The first thing that design should address is functionality (although visual appeal has a significant weight, too). In general, when you want to design something you should ask yourself why do you need to do that. The intention of the Glamour-Morphic-Theme package is to offer a look that uses a minimum amount of graphical variables while allowing you to focus on the main content - which is that thing that you work on, not that thing that you use for your work. I tried to start from zero and add a new variable (e.g., color) only when I could not distinguish something. There are still things that are superfluous (e.g., the border around all tabs, or the bulky shape of an expander), but I did not have enough time and Morphic expertise to do better. Now, orange vs blue is actually not just a matter of taste because your orange is not the same as my blue. There are two reasons: (1) it is stronger, and (2) it appears in more places (e.g., at the bottom of the scrollbar). This means that it will compete for my attention with more force. This might be your intention, but it is not mine because it takes away from my main focus which is the content. Suppose you would make the orange have the same visual weight as the current blue, then it would still not be the same because orange does not mean the same as blue in the cultural meaning it tends to raise. For example, blue is usually perceived as more neutral than other colors, and I want to use blue for this reason (and also because it is the color of Moose). So, all in all, I do not want GLMOrangeUITheme in the Glamour-Morphic-Theme package :), but I do invite people with a UI design interest to build a shared vision that matches the one of the overall Pharo. Doru On 13 Jan 2011, at 11:46, Igor Stasenko wrote: > On 13 January 2011 11:29, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 13 Jan 2011, at 11:12, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >>> On 13 January 2011 10:41, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Of course, it is MIT and you can do what you want with it. I simply >>>> answered the question from Stef, and I meant that I won't include it in >>>> the code from the Glamour repository. If you do want to modify it in the >>>> mentioned direction, I would kindly ask you to use a different name to >>>> avoid confusion and conflicts - this theme is used by the Moose >>>> distribution. >>>> >>> >>> Can you clarify: >>> a) you don't want to modify Glamorous theme (GLMUITheme) by taking >>> all methods from GLMUITheme2. >> >> Yes >> >>> b) you don't want to add a GLMUITheme2 , which is a subclass of GLMUITheme >>> because these changes could live in GLMUITheme2, which is perfectly >>> fine, while keeping an original GLMUITheme >>> not changed. >>> And we can call GLMUITheme2 a 'Glamorous orange' >>> :) >> >> Yes :). It's true that technically it would work, but from an intention >> point of view it does not fit. Also, in general, except on very few >> occasions, I won't support adding anything that has a number at the end to >> distinguish the name :). >> > > Not a big deal.. > We can rename it to > GLMOrangeUITheme > > and make available to Pharo people? > Still no? :) > >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > -- www.tudorgirba.com "To lead is not to demand things, it is to make them happen."
