To throw in my 2 cents: i think double-clicking on an EVEN THINNER seperator would be hard to do. I think it's ok as it is - i don't care about 2 pixels more or less.
One minor thing though: the resize icon with 2 lines ( <-||-> ) is normally being used if there's a completely collapsed (invisible) coulmn between 2 visible coloumns. So the icon with just one line would be more appropriate: <-|->
Thinner separators, and double-click
Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview
-
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:09 pm
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:41 am
I think the new, thinner separator is as functional as old one, while freeing a bit of space and adding lightness to XnView appearance.
I would like to note, that it looks to me like size of active area of separators are the same, so arguments about not-so-easy grabbing of separator are invalid and come out of user auto-suggestion. Also XnView does not care for accessibility features so I don't see any reason it should care here.
I would like to note, that it looks to me like size of active area of separators are the same, so arguments about not-so-easy grabbing of separator are invalid and come out of user auto-suggestion. Also XnView does not care for accessibility features so I don't see any reason it should care here.
-=nightflyer=-
-
- Author of XnView
- Posts: 44920
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
- Location: France
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 1423
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: Paris, France
Thank you for the answer, Pierre.xnview wrote:No, it's not possibleOlivier_G wrote:-> Pierre, is it possible to include that outline into the active area?
So what about this suggestion:
- Active button has been enlarged to 8 pixels in width and 39 in height (vs: 6x31 for previous ones).
- 3D outline (ie: inactive area) is only 1 pixel large.
-> It is slightly smaller than the previous large separator while offering 60% more width for useful/active area. I think it is a good compromise of the various opinions expressed previously.
Olivier
PS: For comparison, here are current implementation (left) and previous suggestion (right):
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2577
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:11 am
- Location: QLD, Australia
-
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:09 pm
-
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:09 pm
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 1423
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: Paris, France
As far as I understand the issue:
- The 3D effect is handled by the GUI manager and Pierre has little control over it: you'll get a 3-4 pixel inactive outline anyway. The only thing you can do is choose the type of outline -> it might be somewhat improved here.
- It might be possible to skip completely that 3D effect and include it in the design of the separators (+whole separator would be active). The issue is that it requires more testing and design work and can't be implemented for 1.90.
Summary: Pierre might come with a slightly better looking solution for 1.90 (with the same active size, etc...). And that's all we should hope for now...
Pierre, is this accurate?
- The 3D effect is handled by the GUI manager and Pierre has little control over it: you'll get a 3-4 pixel inactive outline anyway. The only thing you can do is choose the type of outline -> it might be somewhat improved here.
- It might be possible to skip completely that 3D effect and include it in the design of the separators (+whole separator would be active). The issue is that it requires more testing and design work and can't be implemented for 1.90.
Summary: Pierre might come with a slightly better looking solution for 1.90 (with the same active size, etc...). And that's all we should hope for now...
Pierre, is this accurate?
Olivier
-
- Author of XnView
- Posts: 44920
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
- Location: France
Yes, but currently i can't change it for this versionOlivier_G wrote:As far as I understand the issue:
- The 3D effect is handled by the GUI manager and Pierre has little control over it: you'll get a 3-4 pixel inactive outline anyway. The only thing you can do is choose the type of outline -> it might be somewhat improved here.
- It might be possible to skip completely that 3D effect and include it in the design of the separators (+whole separator would be active). The issue is that it requires more testing and design work and can't be implemented for 1.90.
Summary: Pierre might come with a slightly better looking solution for 1.90 (with the same active size, etc...). And that's all we should hope for now...
Pierre, is this accurate?
Pierre.
-
- Posts: 8705
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Not sure whether this has been discussed before or not:
In Beta 6 all separators "blink" when moving the mouse onto the arrow for minimizing/maximizing the pane area. I.e. the separator is shown in dark gray (instead of light grey). This is a nice gimmick, but
a.) the user is irritated (at least I am whenever moving the mouse onto such an arrow).
b.) if the user happens to move the mouse over the area, the whole separator blinks for a quick instant which is again irritating.
I strongly recommend not to make the separator dark gray. Changing the symbol is enough visual feedback.
In Beta 6 all separators "blink" when moving the mouse onto the arrow for minimizing/maximizing the pane area. I.e. the separator is shown in dark gray (instead of light grey). This is a nice gimmick, but
a.) the user is irritated (at least I am whenever moving the mouse onto such an arrow).
b.) if the user happens to move the mouse over the area, the whole separator blinks for a quick instant which is again irritating.
I strongly recommend not to make the separator dark gray. Changing the symbol is enough visual feedback.
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida