On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:01:08 +0930 David Gowers <00ai99@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > X could work almost unchanged (just, pressing X multiple times in > quick succession would move back through the 5-slot color history, > rather than just swapping the two newest slots. So your current usage > of X would be unchanged, but you could use it to switch between more > than 2 colors) > > So far, no one has given any feedback on the idea, or indeed any > acknowledgement of it. This disappoints me, as it really does fit > neatly into the 'holes' of yahvuu's proposal and would make those > areas even more effective than GIMP currently is before implementing > yahvuu's proposal alone. I didn't understand it at first, and believed that the idea was that 'x' would cycle through the colours in a palette. Meaning that the user would press 'x' once to change to a new colour and another four times to go back to the original. Looking at your animated gif it all makes a lot more sense, although I suspect that the timings will be critical. I would also (as a user) want some method of adjusting or "loading" those five colours, either via 5 swatches in the tool box, or a single "choose colours" dialog. > If we maintain a strict visual order (eg. newest at right -- see my > GIF above), this could work better than naming it 'current' -> > 'previous' It does also resolve a question that was floating around in my head as to what the "new" non-background colour would be called. The gradient tool is an obvious example of one where the foreground/background naming convention is strong, and easy to understand. This might require that the "choose colours" dialog allows a method for swapping the colour order, because having to do it using only 'x' could get annoying when arranging two colours for use in a gradient. -- Jon Senior <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
