X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com From: Peter TB Brett Subject: Re: [geda-user] New icons for gschem Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 19:23:57 +0100 Lines: 67 Message-ID: <874na169xe.fsf@harrington.peter-b.co.uk> References: <5d79ad6f58d01f4f3f604a5a204aaa85 AT mail DOT theimps DOT com> <1378123197 DOT 2185 DOT 11 DOT camel AT AMD64X2> <87li3evrbz DOT fsf AT harrington DOT peter-b DOT co DOT uk> <1378159841 DOT 31945 DOT 18 DOT camel AT AMD64X2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet AT ger DOT gmane DOT org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cpc4-oxfd23-2-0-cust628.4-3.cable.virginmedia.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:VKPCu/A6PTafbY9apXR5SrQVkWM= Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan Salewski writes: > On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 22:36 +0100, Peter TB Brett wrote: >> Stefan Salewski writes: > [...] >>=20 >> Well, it may take some time until I get to PCB, let alone gerbv -- one >> thing at a time! > Of course -- indeed I hope someone other than you may do it -- it should > not need really programming skills. And it is not so difficult when > there exist some well looking examples. I myself am absolutely not an > artist -- but maybe other gEDA users are. I looked at the inkscape icons > long time ago, they have shadows to look nice. It may even be necessary > to test the final icons with different color schemes and different OS -- > I am not sure. > [...] I have been carefully following the GNOME icon style guide (and, to a lesser extent, the Tango icon style guide). There are lots of nice gradients and subtle shadings. ;-) Also there are indeed shadows on the larger (22x22) variants. >> Transitioning to GTK+ 3.x will be a huge hassle. It really is quite >> hostile to multi-key keybindings, for example... >> > That is really sad. My personal view is, that we do not need multi-key > keybindings for EDA tools, because the set of actions is limited, and > most people do not like it. I am using VIM and GVIM for one year now -- > it uses multi-key keybindings much, it is OK for me, and it is justified > because of the large set of available actions. Of course people > customize to gschems multi-key interface may want very strongly to keep > it. > I think that multi-key bindings are actually very important. In Emacs, I like the use of complex keystrokes -- but in Emacs, I have both hands on the keyboard. When using a CAD program I have one hand on the mouse and one hand on the keyboard, and I find that pressing a succession of single keys is more comfortable, especially during long editing sessions. I keep meaning to design a gschem keymap that's optimised for on= ly using the left hand side of a Dvorak keyboard... maybe next time I have to do a complicated design in gEDA! I certainly wouldn't be particularly keen on transitioning to GTK3 if it meant giving up binding to key sequences. :-( Peter =2D-=20 Dr Peter Brett --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlImKT0ACgkQZ7Gbq7g7vpr+DACfTEJJbYQPmjTMWN5qE/JGeMpO caYAn1ctCUJ7pPlYtiBEDg7Z3VWRfNkr =xat/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--