|
Yeah, I use Inkscape too. Note that with Inkscape's visibility icons, the eye-open icon has more of a visual presence to it than the eye-closed icon. Even if you only cast a momentary glance at a Layers dialogue in Inkscape, you can tell that the darker, more obvious symbols mean a visible layer and the lighter symbols mean a hidden one.
Whereas with GIMP, if you go by simple visual weight, the current behavior is (hidden layer) < (visible layer) < (layer in hidden group) when it should be (hidden layer) < (layer in hidden group) < (visible layer). Why should layers-in-hidden-groups get a special icon? Indeed, if you collapse the tree then Perhaps part of the issue is that the visibility icons are (necessarily) displayed as a flat column. That was sufficient when GIMP could only have a flat layer stack, but now that layers can be grouped into a tree ... if there was a way to make the visibility icons nested accordingly, that might help, although it would also mean said icons are no longer in a single convenient column. -- Stratadrake strata_ranger@xxxxxxxxxxx -------------------- Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. From: rob.antonishen@xxxxxxxxx Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 17:02:47 -0400 To: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [enhancement] Improved layer-visibility icons Why re-invent the wheel? Attached are Inkscape's. Very clear. -Rob A> _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list |
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
