On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 timecop@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: <snip> > On the side note, one thing that could use serious serious improvement is > the preferences dialog. I think, the "Tree" structure of organizing > preferences is truly confusing. The tree structure is nice and transparent. Tree structure is natural and good organization of many kinds of information (including preferences). It is the way how people perceive it---you see the overall picture, then you look more closely at a particular information (expand a branch) and see more details and can choose to look even more closely (expand a subbranch, choose a option) or you consider it not interesting, forget it (collapse the branch) and look at something else. > Reserve tree structures for directory > lists and things like that. Why should filesystem have tree structure and preferences not? What's the difference? > Someone using the Gimp for the first time > would expect preferences dialog to look something similar to a tabbed > notebook where each setting is grouped by section, which occupies one tab > of the notebook, etc. And about tabbed anything. Do you mean GIMP preferences should look like http://www.iarchitect.com/tabs.htm#TAB13 or http://www.iarchitect.com/tabs.htm#TAB6 ? There are good reasons to believe that anything tabbed would lead to bad ends especially when the number of tabs (a) would not be really small (2, 3, 4) (b) would have tendency to increase; the main reason is daily experience. Yeti
