Re: [gtk-list] Re: Stupid feature requests

[Jonathan Albrecht <albrecht algorithmics com>]

sumner@pathway.nospam.net wrote:
> 
> Peter Mattis writes:
>  >
>  > Shawn T Amundson writes:
>  > >Isn't this just a matter of shifting the widget that is in the button
>  > >down and right 2(?) pixels?  It shouldn't make a difference what widget it
>  > >is, whether it's a label, pixmap, or a container with both.
>  >
>  > The reason buttons don't move their child down and to the right when
>  > they are depressed is because I don't think that's what is happening
>  > visually. My view of buttons is that you are looking at them straight
>  > on. That is, the user interface lies in a plane and you're above it
>  > looking straight at it. When a button gets pressed it moves directly
>  > away from you. To be absolutely correct I guess the child should
>  > actually shrink a tiny amount. But I don't see why the child should
>  > shift down and to the left. Remember, the child is supposed to be
>  > attached to the buttons surface. Its not good for it to appear like
>  > the child is slipping on the surface of the button.
> 
> I concur with Peter's assessment of the visuals.  It would be weird
> for the pixmaps to move sideways.  Yes, shrinking is technically
> appropriate, but it would look really ugly for some images and isn't
> worth the trouble it would be, IMO.
> 
I have to disagree with all of the above.  Regarding Shawn's quote, I
think it is more than just moving the pixmap.  In windows at least I
think the shadow and hightlights on the edges of the button also
change.  The top and left edges become thicker and the lower and right
edges become corespondingly thinner.  This is why the child doesn't
appear to be slipping.

Shrinking is not correct either.  The mapping of the (apparently) 3d
widgets to your 2d monitor is what I think is called an orthographic
projection.  I hope I have the term right.  It means that any
perspective has been removed so objects that are the same physical size
will always appear to be the same size no matter their distance from the
observer. Nothing ever shrinks when it moves farther from the observer.

Let's say the monitor screen is in the x-y plane and the z direction
gives you the depth information, i.e. things move in and out of the
screen along the direction of z.  Right now in GTK everything moves
straight in and out of the screen so the projection of a vector in the z
direction onto the x-y plane would just be a point.  In windows the same
vector projected onto the x-y plane would be a line which is 45 degrees
down from the x direction.  Neither way is more correct.  They are just
different projections of the same thing.  It's only important to be
consistant.

All that said, I like the windows style better than the motif style
because the extra movement gives me much more visual feedback and a more
'tactile' experience.  I think the motif style looks too simple and
out-of-date.

Jon