On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Sven Neumann wrote: > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:39:58 +0100 > From: Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> > To: Alan Horkan <horkana@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] canvas background options > > Hi, > > Alan Horkan <horkana@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I can understand how that would require you to change it regularly > > and why you might want a menu item for it. How did you like how the > > feature was presented in 2.0 or were you unaware of it until it was > > given a prominant menu item? > > Hiding useful functionality in some obscure button with a right-click > popup menu in the image corner is not really good user interface > design and I am very much surprised that you don't consider this > change an improvement. Given my previous comments that is understandable and I think discoverability is important but it doesn't make sense to have a seperate menu item for every obscure feature and to me this is most definately an obscure feature. (most of the time I shrink wrap my images and dont even see the canvas padding, if I wanted to regularly preview images against a black background I would probably configure the Fullscreen mode for that purpose) Perhaps I might have been less quick to complain if it had been only one menu item that shows a dialog but it is not, it is a submenu with several menu items and that seems a lot like clutter to me. > We also needed that space in the upper right corner for a more useful > and less obscure feature that is also being offered in other > applications: linking the image zoom ratio to the window size. That does seem like a good idea of itself but I dont think it makes the menu items for Canvas Padding idea any better than a workaround. I'm surprised that enough users would be changing the setting often enough to want to be able to set it on a once off per window basis, I would have though that a single global preference would to override the toolkit default would have been enough (which is as far as I can go towards offering an alternative implementation). Sincerely Alan Horkan
