I certainly agree. Both 3 and 4 look really nice; especially using
colors. Perhaps the larger icons would benefit from different colors
per language as well?

Best regards,
Niklas

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Panos <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Choice 4 looks great. Assigning colors to filetype is really easy to
> get your head used to.
>
> On Jan 25, 12:30 pm, björn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Nico,
>>
>> 2009/1/25 Nico Weber:
>>
>>
>>
>> > 1.) Here's how the 16x16 variants currently look:
>>
>> > This looks like the 16x16 docicons of most other apps (which is a
>> > plus, in my eyes). However, the extension text is much too small to be
>> > readable, and the MacVim icon is not really discernible, either. I'm
>> > pretty sure the latter could be fixed by making the V a bit lighter,
>> > though.
>>
>> Yeah, I can't tell them apart at all...
>>
>> > 2.) The first experiment is to leave out the extension text and
>> > instead make the vim icon a bit larger:
>>
>> > Now, the icon is a bit more visible (again, I think this can be
>> > improved by making the V a bit lighter). However, now all small
>> > docicons look the same, so this is probably not a good idea.
>>
>> At first sight (before looking at the others) I thought: not too bad.
>> No worse than 1 at least.
>>
>> > 3.) The next experiments all drop the icon and instead increase the
>> > extension text. The good news is that I found a font that makes it
>> > possible to pack up to 3 characters into a 16x16 icon and keep the
>> > text at least somewhat readable:
>>
>> > The bad news is that for some file types it's not obvious what these 3
>> > letters should be (e.g. "diff", "fscript", ...). Still, this looks ok
>> > to me – the text might not be completely readable, but at least the
>> > icons look a bit different from each other. The font in this version
>> > is Envy Code R bold.
>>
>> Wow!  I think this is pretty awesome...I can quite easily distinguish
>> between different icons and looking closer I can read the extension.
>>
>> > 4.) Next up is the same, but with different colors for the different
>> > file types:
>>
>> > This makes it easier to distinguish the file types, but it's a bit
>> > weird that all higher-resolution docicons look similar and greenish
>> > (because of the vim icon) but some 16x16 variants are red or pink.
>> > Furthermore, since the 16x16 icon is displayed as proxy icon in the
>> > title bar, these icons might be a bit distracting.
>>
>> Again, I really quite like these! The different colors remind me of
>> the Xcode icons (which I think are great).  If the colors were chosen
>> more carefully I think this could be a winner, but I would not mind
>> option 3 if lots of people _did_ find the colors distracting.
>>
>> > 5.) This is the same as the first text-only version, but with Envy
>> > Code R non-bold:
>>
>> > 6.) Finally, this is with a non-monospaced font that Damien Guard, the
>> > creator of Envy Code R, is currently working on (this font has no bold
>> > style yet):
>>
>> These are ok (i.e. better than 1 and 2 by far), but I prefer 3 and 4
>> because of the boldness gives them more contrast.
>>
>> Björn
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to