Discussion:
Various old comments on Jasper GNUstep icons experiment
Fabien VALLON
2005-04-01 14:45:29 UTC
Permalink
On 2005-04-01 15:54:06 +0200 Quentin Mathé <gnustep-***@club-internet.fr> wrote:


http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html

I hope you will not design your UI as you respect netiquette ...

Fabien
M. Uli Kusterer
2005-04-01 15:25:37 UTC
Permalink
Latest new from my side! This
(http://www.jasperhauser.nl/projects/gnustep/)
is the url of the webpage containing the icons
I have worked on so far.
Well they look really nice. We get very
positive feedback from other GNUstep
users/developers about them. The file icon
should be more rectangular and less square,
that's our only remark.
Regarding this I have put a comment on my icon
page. My point is that I think a file icon
should have a more generic size instead of
directly referring to a4 as a4 only refers to
text and european print sizes. While if we
would do a square size a) we would look more
distinct and b) the size would be more generic
and thus would also fit with other contexts
like audio or movies. But hey that's just my
point of view :)
Your point is not stupid ;-). I think you can
continue to use this square path for the files
icons.
I don't agree. At least for Europeans, A4 is the
format that actually causes people to recognize
this square as a sheet of paper, and not a bent
sheet of metal. US Long and other US formats look
fairly similar, so I'd think it is similar for US
users.

I'm also not sure that the office metaphor for
"documents" still holds true for today's
computers, which are just as often used for
playing movies and sounds, viewing E-Mails etc.
Maybe we'd want to consider a more liberal icon
look for user files ("documents") of all objects.
E.g. I could see a film reel used for movie types
(maybe with film a little unrolled and a few
frames visible towards the "eye" of the user).
However, today's most natural music storage
medium would be a CD... which conflicts with data
CDs...

It would also be necessary to find another way
to distinguish applications from documents... In
a component-based architecture like Etoile, they
could probably all based around a plugin-design,
but that would still be problematic for all kinds
of tools (compression programs, converters), not
to mention not yet representative of the current
realities of GNUstep application development.

So, maybe the "document" look is the best we have right now.
We have discussed the both options, finally we
prefer the first render strictly isometric, but
what is the best will be known when we will see
the other icons to be created with a 3d view.
The policy will perhaps be something a bit more
loose than a strict isometric view.
Yes, you said something similar last time I
commented on the Icon Guidelines. While I agree
that a common perspective for icons will help
make it look less patchwork, I think it'll
actually increase recognizability if a more
realistic 3D perspective is used. Some shapes are
nearly unrecognizable when drawn in strict
45-degree isometric view.
In my opinion every file type icon, in this
example the generic file icon, should also
have versions for as many file types as is
needed. In the case of the generic files we
already have a whole bunch. This should be the
same for folders, cds, drives etc.
Well for folders like System folder, Fonts
folder etc., it could be consideredŠ but for
CD/DVD or hard disks we will use a badge to
specify the type clearly (DVD, CD-RW, Firewire,
USB etc.)
Well, I kinda like how MacOS tries to make
removable media look like the actual media. So,
for CDs/CD-RWs/DVDs, basing them on a generic
"CD" icon and badging that instead of using a
generic hard disk icon would be a good idea.
Helps maintain the association between the medium
and the icon.
As long as it is functional. I think this
should be done opposed to badging which is a
very crude solution. Maybe badging should only
be applied in certain cases such as
document/application relations, or as is done
is OSX by adding a small lock when a file is
locked/secured.
I don't think badging is a very crude solution
(except may be for the folder case), in my
opinion a badge is very often more readable
than a logo integrated with the perspective in
the icon; personally I don't like how it is
done with hard disks icons on Mac OS X.
Moreover we can expand IconKit in order to
allow applying transforms to badges, then we
would be able to incorporate them in icon
perspective as you have done with hard disks
variations.
I agree. With the nifty features IconKit has (or
can offer in the future), badging will be a
fairly manageable solution. The badges would
simply be parts that are composited on a generic
icon.
The word application says to me; a software
product that is capable of doing (...)
The two real life objects are ok and the icon
is nice, but there is a problem on perspective,
the icon is flat, or we would like to have
applications with an isometric view (may be not
exactly isometric) or a view similar to
Plugin2Š the icon improved to include theses
two real life objects positioned in a
perspective would be ok. To take an example,
pencil could be kept similarly in front but
with tool put on the floor in a way which
introduces a depth, a perspective in the icon.
I agree. This also looks rather a lot like MacOS, with the two crossed tools.
To comment your power plug idea (for plugin),
here is an other possible example : keep the
icon as it is currently, but add a power plug
on floor in front of the tool/pencil crossed
and introduces this power plug by using a cord
which disappears behind them by creating a
perspective effect. Power plug would illustrate
the application idea : applications exists to
be connected to a document or a location, and
the electricity concept which is induced : the
possibility to change the state of stuff the
application will interact with.
Don't like it. The idea of "plugging an
application into a document" seems not at all
natural or logical to me. An application is at
most a plug-in for the *system* that extends it
to handle particular kinds of files, but its
relation to a document is as a tool, not as a
component or container. (the only apps that I can
think of that are containers are concoctions like
iPhoto or iTunes which manage their own
libraries... which I personally would suggest
rather be done as a workspace plugin).

I'm also not a fan too much of the symbols on
the document icons. They waste a lot of pixels
with thick lines. Thus, the paper sheet not only
removes the ability to distinguish them by their
shapes, the icons also mainly occupy the same
square area and use the same colors. It will be
*very* hard to spot all movies in a mixed list of
movie and image files, plus maybe a few text
files.
AnywayŠ
We need to probably to try several ideas hereŠ
Have you thoughts of other concepts or objects
to associate in order to suggest semantics like
"to act" , "to interact", "to transform" which
are bound to application idea ?
Might be a good idea to have different kinds of
applications. At least Tools (i.e. non-document
apps) and Applications (document-based) might be
a starting point.
As with previous icons I followed the given
guidelines. The cube as was, was not enough to
convey plug in to me so I added a power cord
plug icon to it. Note that I do think it might
be good for developers to put there
application icon on the side of the cube
instead of rendering the app icon in the
bottom right corner.
For application icon, we will badge it by
default because it is more readable in our
opinion than to have it rendered on the side of
cube, but anyway developer will have
possibility to create its own custom plugin
icon. And we would prefer to have a symbolic
puzzle piece (rather than a power plug symbol)
put on the top of cube with an engraved or
embossed effect.
Well, the puzzle piece beats the electric plug,
I think. After all, electric plugs don't
integrate two objects, the simply provide power
for one. So, IMHO, the metaphor wouldn't work. It
only works for English, where the word actually
contains the word "plug". But plays on words
simply don't translate into other languages that
well.

Maybe it'd be even better to have two, three or
four puzzle pieces there, two of them connected
(or a split-second before being connected, so the
seam is still clearly visible) and one a little
aside? MacOS had a single puzzle piece, and it
wasn't really obvious what that was.

The building block approach itself isn't too
bad, but we'd need some sort of building block
that is recognizable. Maybe three blocks, like
that NeXT promo image (was that in IB's about
screen?). Maybe one could just make the block
look as if it was made of Legos, and then
composite an application-specific image on the
front?
The file icons are ok but they should be
smaller (they are too big when they are side by
side with folder icons or may be folder icons
are too small), and includes a colored
representation (probably more detailed) to
illustrate each media and makes the distinction
between each of them easier by relying on a
dominant color.
That's definitely worth thinking about. With
Nesedah basically being "color-reduced" of sorts,
the same might work for the icons, too. If only
documents and folders had color (and didn't
impinge on each other's color space), that could
work at helping distinguish them.
Folder looks too much like a Mac OS X one.
First I think you should eliminate vertical
stripes in the back part. Ideally too, you
should try something completely different like
folders examples at the end of this mail.
The problem with the folders you attached is
that most of them are hardly recognizable as
folders. Jasper's are better from the general
shape, but lack the physicality. The material
seems all wrong. It doesn't have a fold at the
bottom, it looks mainly like packing paper...
I know you will look at this and think "hey
where did the 3d house go" well I just dumped
it. I have always irritated my ass of in OS X
where they also use a building icon instead of
a home FOLDER. It's a folder so it should look
like one otherwise (newby) users will wonder
why it doesn't look like one. A folder is a
folder period!
I actually agree. It's an unfortunate mix of metaphors.
May be you right, but I'm still not sure that
the right decision, but anyway even if it's a
represented with a folder, the house should
stands more when you look at itŠ
Technically it is true that home is a folder,
but when you consider it on user side, it is
really more a concept than just a directory, so
to illustrate it "the house" seems to be really
effective.
Well, I think it should still be recognizable as
a folder. That's a concept the user already
learned, and different from a drive or /dev/
entries that Unix just represents with
directories, but which are actually something
entirely different to them. The only way in which
the home folder is different is that the user may
mess with it all they want.
Well when you will try another folder design,
what would be nice is to have possibility to
add 3d house on front of the folder or over itŠ
Especially when you take in account the fact we
would like to avoid icons incorporated in other
icons perspective directly.
That could work. I think BeOS (now Zeta) does this.
To be honest, theses hard disks icons are the
ones which we like the less, because they looks
like a Mac OS X icons themeŠ sorry to said that.
Yeah, sad but true. Especially the rounded
corners and the caps on both ends. They're
gorgeous icons nonetheless.

The problematic part with hard disk icons is
that most of our users have never seen a real
hard disk (one that looks like the MacOS X hard
disk icon), but only seen the computer containing
one, or the casing of an external hard disk. And
both of these come in so many different designs
that it is very hard to just pick one.

One option would be to hold a poll about the
external hard disks most people have these days,
and to try and find a look that is similar to
*all of these*. But that sounds easier than it
would be, I guess.

Another option would be to take a step back,
look at what a hard disk does and is and try to
find a metaphor instead. The only thing I can
think of is, again, an office metaphor, like a
filing cabinet. After all, that's used for
storing folders and files. But that already
breaks down with movies...

I'm not really happy with either of these
approaches. Especially as, if we choose the
"filing cabinet" metaphor, we'd really have to
consistently stick to it, in all documentation,
in application windows etc. Not to mention: Try
to explain to a user that the little box they
just connected to their computer will show up as
a filing cabinet in there ... :-/
--
Cheers,
M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere..."
http://www.zathras.de
Jasper Hauser
2005-04-01 17:23:15 UTC
Permalink
Hi everybody,

I hope to finally post the work I did on new file icons later this
weekend.

Jasper

Loading...