Re: [Gimp-developer] small suggestion for consistency
I tend to agree with Simon that “Layer” seems appropriate for this usage. On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:00 AM Simon Budig wrote: > Hi Marco. > > Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:37:12AM +0200, Simon Budig wrote: > > > Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) > wrote: > > > > The menu layer should named layers for consistency with the other > > > > menus like colors, tools, filters. > > > > > > Would you suggest to change "Image" to "Images" as well? > > > > No. Image deal with _one_ image at a time. Level deal with one or more > > levels at a time (see below). > > > > > Both feels wrong to me, since the "Layer" menu mostly deals with > actions > > > affecting just one layer (the current one). > > > > Layer groups are made not of just one layer. > > Same as for a stack of layers. > [...] > > and layers deals with multiple layers in the image, in groups and in a > stack. > > > > ... but this is just an observation and a suggestion ... > > I might be missing something obvious, but when looking at the Layer-Menu > I can see one menu entry that affects all layers simultaneously: > Layer->Stack->Reverse Layer order. > > All other entries are really quite specific to the currently selected > layer: either by moving it to some other position in the stack, > selecting a layer in a specific relation to the current layer, Change > the current layer size etc... > > Granted, some of these implicitely affect the other layers in the stack, > but there always is the one designated layer that the operation is > defined by. > > True, if the current layer is a layer group, these operations work on a > set of sub-layers, but that is more an effect of having currently > selected a layer group - the operations still work on the currently > selected item in the layer stack (and its child items). > > It feels a little bit like bike shedding, but I still believe that > "Layer" is correct. > > Bye, > Simon > -- > si...@budig.de http://simon.budig.de/ > ___ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > -- https://patdavid.net GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D 18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] small suggestion for consistency
Hi Marco. Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:37:12AM +0200, Simon Budig wrote: > > Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) wrote: > > > The menu layer should named layers for consistency with the other > > > menus like colors, tools, filters. > > > > Would you suggest to change "Image" to "Images" as well? > > No. Image deal with _one_ image at a time. Level deal with one or more > levels at a time (see below). > > > Both feels wrong to me, since the "Layer" menu mostly deals with actions > > affecting just one layer (the current one). > > Layer groups are made not of just one layer. > Same as for a stack of layers. [...] > and layers deals with multiple layers in the image, in groups and in a stack. > > ... but this is just an observation and a suggestion ... I might be missing something obvious, but when looking at the Layer-Menu I can see one menu entry that affects all layers simultaneously: Layer->Stack->Reverse Layer order. All other entries are really quite specific to the currently selected layer: either by moving it to some other position in the stack, selecting a layer in a specific relation to the current layer, Change the current layer size etc... Granted, some of these implicitely affect the other layers in the stack, but there always is the one designated layer that the operation is defined by. True, if the current layer is a layer group, these operations work on a set of sub-layers, but that is more an effect of having currently selected a layer group - the operations still work on the currently selected item in the layer stack (and its child items). It feels a little bit like bike shedding, but I still believe that "Layer" is correct. Bye, Simon -- si...@budig.de http://simon.budig.de/ ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] small suggestion for consistency
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 03:17:20PM +0200, Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:37:12AM +0200, Simon Budig wrote: > > Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) wrote: > > > The menu layer should named layers for consistency with the other > > > menus like colors, tools, filters. > > > > Would you suggest to change "Image" to "Images" as well? > > No. Image deal with _one_ image at a time. Level deal with one or more > levels at a time (see below). sorry s/level/layer/g -- Marco Ciampa I know a joke about UDP, but you might not get it. GNU/Linux User #78271 FSFE fellow #364 ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] small suggestion for consistency
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:37:12AM +0200, Simon Budig wrote: > Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) wrote: > > The menu layer should named layers for consistency with the other > > menus like colors, tools, filters. > > Would you suggest to change "Image" to "Images" as well? No. Image deal with _one_ image at a time. Level deal with one or more levels at a time (see below). > Both feels wrong to me, since the "Layer" menu mostly deals with actions > affecting just one layer (the current one). Level groups are made not of just one level. Same as for a stack of levels. > "Filters" is a collection of multiple filters, right > "Tools" is a collection of multiple tools, right > "Colors" deals with multiple colors in the image. right and levels deals with multiple levels in the image, in groups and in a stack. ... but this is just an observation and a suggestion ... TIA -- Marco Ciampa I know a joke about UDP, but you might not get it. GNU/Linux User #78271 FSFE fellow #364 ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] small suggestion for consistency
Marco Ciampa via gimp-developer-list (gimp-developer-list@gnome.org) wrote: > The menu layer should named layers for consistency with the other > menus like colors, tools, filters. Would you suggest to change "Image" to "Images" as well? Both feels wrong to me, since the "Layer" menu mostly deals with actions affecting just one layer (the current one). "Filters" is a collection of multiple filters, "Tools" is a collection of multiple tools, "Colors" deals with multiple colors in the image. Bye, Simon -- si...@budig.de http://simon.budig.de/ ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] A suggestion for GIMP developers
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 09:30:39PM +0100, C R via gimp-developer-list wrote: > Hi. Do you want to draw the selection from a path? I think he means to add a button with the function "Stroke selection" as it is already present in the path option dialog for the path tool. In the selection tools such button is missing but also all "Select" commands like Shrik, Grow, Invert, etc. Probably the reason is this: to not clutter the "options" tool dialog with commands. In the path tool there are fewer options so putting also some commands, although a bit inconsistent, makes sense. Sorry for my bad English -- Marco Ciampa I know a joke about UDP, but you might not get it. GNU/Linux User #78271 FSFE fellow #364 ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
