Re: Font Configuration Applet

[Markus Bertheau <twanger bluetwanger de>]

В Вск, 05/12/2004 в 00:44 +0100, uws пишет:
> På Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:22:16PM +0100, Markus Bertheau skrev:
> > if we add another font category, "Document Font", to the font
> > configuration applet, then there's for sure too much widgets on it. I'd
> > propose the following:
> > 
> > Remove application font, desktop font and window title font in favour of
> > one preference. For window titles that font is used in bold.
> 
> Why? Did you ever see how many space a bold font needs? Did you ever see how
> ugly bold fonts are?

I don't have a persona in my imaginary set of GNOME personas that finds
bold fonts ugly.

> The number of widgets does not look like a problem for me. A descriptive
> header in the capplet will be needed, I think.

More widgets - more confusion. More text - more confusion.

> > I don't see a lot of mamas wanting a different font for the desktop than
> > for applications. And that who cares that much about his window title
> > font is an artist anyway - in my imaginal set of personas for the GNOME
> > desktop there is no artist.
> 
> My application font-size is 8pt. My desktop font-size is 20pt. My desktop
> icons are also scaled by a 1.5 factor. Why? Because I want to see _in a
> glance_ what's on my desktop. I put .desktop files, symlinks and other stuff
> on my desktop because I want them to be clearly visible.

I do think that 8 pt application font size and 20 pt desktop font size
is a corner case that has not to be accounted for in the ui. Besides,
you can still set this with gconf.

> > This allows us to add a document font property and end up with less
> > widgets than before.
> 
> "Less widgets" does not sound like a good rationale. "Better user
> experience" does, though.

Less widgets = less confusion = better user experience. More widgets,
more configurability = more confusion = worse user experience.

> > In my opinion the four variants for anti aliasing should also be reduced
> > to two: LCD or not. Of course it would be better if this could be auto
> > detected.
> 
> What about the "Details" button?

I've never needed it, so I would remove it - I don't see the need for
it. But as I don't know the reasons why it was put in in the first
place, I cannot really substantiate this claim.

-- 
Markus Bertheau <twanger bluetwanger de>