On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 01:04 +0200, Michael Schumacher wrote: > Philip Ganchev wrote: > > On 10/12/06, Jakub Steiner <jimmac@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> The two major use cases when this would be a more efficient interface is > >> for us GIMPers who already know what functionality they want and don't > >> need to go three levels deep, but also for novice users for who it will > >> perhaps be easier to search for 'replace color' instead of browsing > >> through the menu tree. If filters and functions have some additional > >> metadata, providing for example name of the same functionality in > >> competing graphic packages, things would become easier to discover for > >> novices. > > > > I agree that the commands should be searchable by many terms. But I > > think all terms should be part of the description, not be metadata. > > We should probably check how emacs does this - the M-x whatever-command > is pretty close to this proposal, and there are ways to seach for > specific commands as well. No. You don't want to look at emacs code. Really. Such an interface is easy enough to implement, should we ever decide to want it. I seriously doubt its usefullness for the vast majority of GIMP users. ciao, --mitch _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
