Sven,
I appreciate that you want to mediate to make things go forward.
> Srihari has brought up this topic often and informed about
> the progress. Many people, including Peter, joined the
> discussion and the purpose was already discussed.
> So, many things are not really new.
as things stand right now, the biggest thing that is wrong
with TITo is that there seems to be no underlying purpose.
lacking this it is a rather jumbled combination of features,
which exactly expresses this purposelessness.
if the purpose of TITo is so clear, then tell me what it is,
including a few words why it is valuable for GIMP users.
(anybody can contribute to this, it is just that
Srihari and Jehan have to the final say on this definition,
that is the right they earned by putting in the bulk of the
code contribution)
I give you an example, so you know what I am asking for:
‘the Undo system is valuable to GIMP users because it
allows them to proceed without fear (of doing something wrong).’
you see I defined Undo not by its functionality, but
by what it means to users.
people have already asked me: ‘just say what should be changed
about TITo.’
I can tell you, once I know what it should be.
--ps
founder + principal interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://blog.mmiworks.net: on interaction architecture
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
