Re: [Gimp-developer] Re : Feedback from an ordinary user

[Nemes Sorin <nemes sorin gmail com>]

On 11/25/2012 04:59 AM, Cristian Secară wrote:
> În data de Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:32:55 +0200, Alexia Death a scris:
>
> > [...] Save is "safe" and always keeps everthing you can see in GIMP
> > UI - you can continue editing from it. Export is always destructive.
> > No other format than XCF supports all gimp features.
> Just curious: assuming I open an existing .png file, either do nothing
> or just crop to some smaller dimension, then export it again as .png
> file format. What is destructive in this case from the file type
> perspective ? (your statement about export being *always* destructive)
>
> Should I understand that in the exported version GIMP will alter
> somehow the original .png file structure so that it becomes
> "destructive" ?
>
> Cristi
.. but "Save" is not a "safe" term also and not very explicit - our 
(new) user will think he will save changes he made to his file, NOT the 
fact that he  will save his file as XCF - so the problem which may arise 
for some new users is the fact they expect to get a modified JPG or PNG 
file as a direct action of "Save" not a new "GIMP Project file".

"Save file as Project" or "Save as a GIMP project" - those words make a 
clear sense for  the user about what will happen. My proposal is to 
change "Save" in something which will point very clear about the 
creation of a "source" or "project" file -

"Overwrite .." is ok because the filename and action are indicated, no 
need for guessing.

For complex programs such GIMP or Photoshop the plain word (and the 
plain notion) of (just) "Save" is not as usable as a clearly defined 
action.

For any computer software which have a GUI, description of controls 
should reflect the exact action which will happen when that control is 
used.