RE: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons

[Andree Proulx <aiproulx@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry, did see you were referring to
Randy's comment.

Randy is wrong, it is not a + sign,
it is a diamond / sparkle shape.
New/create is a sparkle.
Add is a plus sign.

New and add are different concepts represented
differently. New is a sparkle, positioned top right corner. Add is a plus
sign positioned center left.
The sparkle is meant to fade on its
edges like a spark of light.

Clarification regarding folders name.
The decision for folder name vs other taxonomy, came from the original
platform UI team architects for eclipse 1.0.
The UI design team adapted its processes
and procedures for it. Since the release of eclipse 1.0 several other tools
and products are using the same processes and procedure as they have clearly
save us considerable amount of time in file management, archiving and search
retrieval for cross referencing.

I like the fact that file name are unique
to a concept. Icon state (disabled) is secondary.

andree

Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Sent by: cdt-ui-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

05/21/2004 04:00 PM

To	Bill Bull <bbull@xxxxxxx>
cc	cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject	RE: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons

FYI: 

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=53617

comment #64 


------- Additional Comments From nick_edgar@xxxxxxxxxx  2004-05-21
15:48 -------
Re comment #18.

For products building on Eclipse, no code changes should be necessary to
get
colour icons.  However, it is likely that the graphic design for the
icons would
need to be updated to be less bright and saturated, for consistency with
Eclipse
SDK icons.  There are different design constraints when colour in
icons is used
only when hovering over the item, rather than having the icons always be
in colour.

If the app sets the "hover" variants for actions
(IAction.setHoverImageDescriptor), this will now be used for the regular
enabled
image as well.  The regular image set by IAction.setImageDescriptor
will be
ignored if setHoverImageDescriptor is also set.  If no hover variant
is set, the
regular image will be used, and will not be converted to gray scale.

This behaviour is controlled in JFace via
ActionContributionItem.setUseColorIconsInToolbars(boolean).  The default
in
JFace is true.  The Workbench overrides this default with a preference
setting.
The setting for this default is now true (it was false in 2.1).  

In 2.1, the user had the ability to turn on colour icons in the Appearance
preference page.  In 3.0, this preference has been removed.

If an app wants the 2.1 behaviour, this can be achieved by adding the following
line to the plugin_customization.ini file of the app's primary feature:
org.eclipse.ui.workbench/COLOR_ICONS=false 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

re: folder name vs file name. 
Conventionally?.. 

As mentioned the c folders are deprecated. 
The reasons for folder name change is to keep the file name of the object
the same. It is easier to manage corresponding images when there is the
same count in seperate folders. 
It is also easier to have scripts cut the icons keep the same file name
and simply place them in a different folder. 

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think it is easier to sort the content of folders
and folders themselves with prefix, rather then suffix.

Thanks for your comment, will keep it in mind for next cycle.

andree

Bill Bull <bbull@xxxxxxx>

05/21/2004 02:51 PM

To	Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc	cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject	RE: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons

Great thanks, the CDT project is quite a bit behind that. They're still
referencing the hover state and the use of the image is inconsistant. I'll
probably go through the plugin.xml files this weekend and get them sorted
out and posted to the list. 
  
Just out of curiosity, is there a reason for the c,d,e directory structure?
Conventionally, I would have had them in a single directory with a suffix.
It makes exporting and archiving tremendously easier. 
  
By the way I didn't file a bug, but I still feel like your "plus"
moniker isn't clear enough - they lose their shape on higher resolution
moniters. I really would recommend squaring off the corners.
  
I just read bug/comment
#54 from Randy Hudson: 
  
"The "new" decorator icon looks more like one of the gems
from bejeweled.  I think it is supposed to be a + sign, but it looks
like a diamond to me." 
  
-bill 
-----Original Message-----
From: Andree Proulx [mailto:aiproulx@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 2:02 PM
To: bbull@xxxxxxx
Subject: Fw: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons


Bill ..  fyi... 


----- Forwarded by Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM on 05/21/2004 02:00 PM -----

Michael Van Meekeren/Ottawa/IBM

05/20/2004 10:19 PM

To	Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Subject	Re: Fw: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled IconsLink

tool owners can ship color , enabled and disabled icons and use them as
before.  However what we have done is remove the color icons use and
use only enbled and disabled.  We no longer have a preference to use
brighter color icons. 

There are some notes about what we have done here:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=53617#c42

/michael

Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM

05/20/2004 01:06 PM

To	Michael Van Meekeren/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Subject	Re: Fw: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled IconsLink

sorry, I meant to ask: Do tool owners have to make any code changes to
use enabled vs colored folders?

Michael Van Meekeren/Ottawa/IBM

05/20/2004 01:03 PM

To	Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Subject	Re: Fw: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled IconsLink

No they still need to use the disabled icon folder.  SWT has not suitably
fixed this problem for us.

Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM

05/19/2004 06:17 PM

To	Michael Van Meekeren/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Subject	Fw: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons

Michael, 

Can you please answer this question for me: 
Do you know if the CDT development team needs to make changes to stop using
the disabled icon folder, or were these images handled at the Eclipse SWT
level? 


andrée 


----- Forwarded by Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM on 05/19/2004 06:14 PM -----

Bill Bull <bbull@xxxxxxx>

05/19/2004 03:44 PM

To	Andree Proulx/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Subject	RE: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons

Ok, great that answers my next question. (Amount of saturation and brightness
for disabled images.) I'm attaching a summary sheet of the current images
for your reference. I'll merge the new images that match and proceed with
the variations. I assume the enabled folders will now have full color icons.
Do you know if the CDT develpment team needs to make changes to stop using
the disabled icon folder, or were these images handled at the Eclipse SWT
level? 
 
-bill 
-----Original Message-----
From: Andree Proulx [mailto:aiproulx@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:32 PM
To: Bill Bull
Cc: cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cdt-ui-dev] Disabled Icons


In Eclipse 3.0 the icon folders starting with "c" are deprecated.
Colored icons are stored in "e" folders. E stands for enabled.
Disabled icons for toolbars are still required. 

Find included the photoshop action script to create the disabled state.


andrée

Bill Bull <bbull@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: cdt-ui-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

05/19/2004 02:10 PM

To	"'cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	[cdt-ui-dev] Diabled Icons

In the CDT, should all disabled versions of icons be procedurally generated?

In the org.eclipse.cdt.ui_2.0.0 folder there are a number of subfolders
with
disabled versions. (dlcl16, dtool16, etc.) These also seem to be incomplete
- not all of the icons in the corresponding active folder have diabled
version.

Am I looking at something depricated, or just not up to speed with the
latest way of doing things? 

-bill
_______________________________________________
cdt-ui-dev mailing list
cdt-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-ui-dev
[attachment "cdt-icons.zip" deleted by Michael Van Meekeren/Ottawa/IBM]