[06:09] <coz_> HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL !
[03:12] <klepas> kwwii: ping
[03:12] <kwwii> klepas: hi
[03:13] <klepas> what's going to happen in regard to 1px borders on the 16x & 22px icons in Oxygen?
[03:13] <kwwii> klepas: not much, I guess
[03:13] <klepas> i'm out of the loop in regards to Oxygen, figured i'd ask you rather than pop a possibly stupid question over the ml
[03:13] <kwwii> hehe
[03:13] <klepas> so no 1px borders?
[03:13] <kwwii> well, we are thinking about it, but it nothing has been decided yet
[03:14] <kwwii> I am not sure whether it will happen or not
[03:14] <klepas> *nod*
[03:14] <kwwii> when we started the set, we have black borders around them
[03:14] <kwwii> and then we removed them
[03:14] <kwwii> so going back to using them might take a while
[03:14] <kwwii> anyway, we are thinking about not using 16x16 icons anymore
[03:15] <klepas> although you probably know this, they don't need to be black :-)
[03:15] <kwwii> yeah
[03:15] <klepas> no 16px icons?
[03:15] <kwwii> if it were to happen, I guess we would add a very light border
[03:15] <kwwii> yepp
[03:15] <kwwii> :p
[03:15] <klepas> other than for folders in a file browser
[03:15] <kwwii> we would still make them, for certain things
[03:16] <klepas> i use 16px desktop wide
[03:16] <kwwii> but in general they would no longer be used in most thing
[03:16] <kwwii> s
[03:16] <klepas> maximizes working space
[03:16] <kwwii> ouch
[03:16] <kwwii> how big is your monitor?
[03:16] <klepas> i find it brilliant
[03:16] <klepas> 1680x1050
[03:16] <kwwii> wow
[03:16] <kwwii> well, in kde4 we are moving one size up for almost everything
[03:17] <klepas> i know all the icons, where what is and what they do mostly off by heart for the apps i use the most
[03:17] <klepas> what prompted that?
[03:17] <kwwii> we had a long discussion - but nothing is certain yet
[03:17] <kwwii> we will still have and use 16px icons
[03:17] <kwwii> but not per defualt
[03:18] <kwwii> well, a few will always be needed per defualt
[03:18] <mhb> kwwii: how big your monitor must be in order to ditch 16^2 icons?
[03:18] <kwwii> mhb: that is not really the point, I was just wondering if he had a small monitor since he said he like to maximize the space
[03:19] <klepas> if i was on a 1920x1200 i'd still do what i do now
[03:19] <kwwii> mainly, 16px icons are used for menus and in the filebrowser
[03:19] <klepas> i love it
[03:19] <klepas> those are, i find, still normally 22px at minimum by default under KDE and GNOME
[03:19] <kwwii> so until now the biggest change is that we want to use 22x22 in the menus
[03:20] <klepas> whoa...
[03:20] <klepas> have you guys mocked up Konq's interface with those?
[03:20] <kwwii> actually, there is little difference in size of the menus because we are changing the spacing as well
[03:20] <klepas> i think seeing some potential shots of how it would look like are (a) good (turnoff)
[03:20] <kwwii> we have test code which we changed and it works and looks nice
[03:21] <klepas> what about the text?
[03:21] <klepas> are you going to increase the default desktop font size too?
[03:21] <kwwii> the text stays the same
[03:21] <klepas> that's quite weird... then with the suddenly larger icons?
[03:21] <kwwii> basically in the menus we reduced the spacing around the icons
[03:22] <klepas> so now they are more cluttered?
[03:22] <kwwii> again, none of this is "decided" only in testing
[03:22] <klepas> sorry, i'm not meaning to give you a bashing or anything -- it just seems like a strange decision that i find is unecessary
[03:22] <kwwii> the thing is, you do not really see them as being cluttered
[03:23] <klepas> i haven't seen how it all looks like with the changes being proposed but although it personally sounds not like an improvement, i can't see it's purpose
[03:23] <kwwii> look at osx and see how many 16px icons they use
[03:24] <kwwii> almost none
[03:24] <klepas> fsck osx
[03:24] <kwwii> hehehe
[03:24] <kwwii> it is the nicest looking dekstop around
[03:24] <kwwii> and almost everyone agrees on that
[03:24] <klepas> last time i checked, and i posted this on the ml recently too: no free software project should just model themselves after osx
[03:24] <klepas> unless there was dedicated to do that
[03:24] <kwwii> but again, we'll test and test again before anything is final
[03:25] <klepas> i'd love to see some screenshots
[03:25] <kwwii> oh, we are not doing that at all...just trying to make the nicest looking desktop we can :-)
[03:25] <klepas> (by looking at what osx do and if it's pretty model it? is the question that's going around though... =\ )
[03:26] <TheSheep> actually osx is becoming old slowly
[03:26] <kwwii> once we get that far, I am sure that there will be lots of discussion and such
[03:26] <kwwii> TheSheep: yeah, you are right there too
[03:26] <TheSheep> it's better to be a step ahead :)
[03:26] <klepas> behind...
[03:26] <klepas> osx :)
[03:27] <klepas> (in it's shadows...)
[03:27] <klepas> sorry
[03:27] <klepas> :)
[03:27] <klepas> kwwii: is there a chance you could shoot me a link to some screenshots or something of the sort?
[03:28] <kwwii> klepas: if I had any, or had code to do it, i would, but I do not
[03:29] <kwwii> it is a long way from reality
[03:29] <kwwii> a long, long way
[03:29] <kwwii> one dev tried it out to see how much of a problem it would be
[03:34] <kwwii> sometime in the next couple of months we will put a usability test online, which everyone can take part it
[03:34] <kwwii> s/it/in
[03:34] <klepas> there's a brilliant idea
[03:35] <kwwii> it will help us form a good idea of what everyone thinks, not just a few artists or devs ;-)
[03:35] <msikma> TheSheep: if you think you can be one step ahead, design-wise, of commercial systems, especially the likes of Mac OS X, then good luck.
[03:35] <kwwii> msikma: well put
[03:36] <kwwii> I wonder how much money apple or win puts into the design of their respective desktops
[03:36] <msikma> I'm not saying it's impossible, but you must consider the fact that a large team of dedicated and seasoned designers have worked on it for a long time.
[03:36] <klepas> i just don't see why Mac OS X is always the one that work is being compared to
[03:36] <TheSheep> msikma: you can rip from them and extend :)
[03:36] <kwwii> TheSheep: but that is not really getting ahead
[03:36] <kwwii> just going around
[03:37] <klepas> i don't doubt that Apple has spent a large sum of money on the design work... i just dislike the attitude of "it's what mac does"
[03:37] <TheSheep> msikma: I see a problem with the fact that they are designers (artists) not cognitive psychologists and ui specialists (scientists)
[03:37] <klepas> as a justification of choices in design
[03:37] <msikma> kwwii: I think they put a lot more money in it than Microsoft. It's difficult to change the theme in Mac OS X, and you need to resort to hacks to do that. There's no alternative except making all blue look grey. They are really, really concerned with making sure people can't mess up their interface
[03:37] <msikma> TheSheep: do you really think that Apple hasn't hired a whole team of usability experts?
[03:38] <TheSheep> msikma: I'm pretty sure they fired a large number of them recently
[03:38] <msikma> "Pretty sure"?
[03:38] <klepas> if the designer can't justify the choice they've made without saying "it's what mac does" then there is a preblem
[03:38] <msikma> So that's a reason for doubting the process of a major company who puts design first? I don't find that very constructive, personally.
[03:39] <kwwii> klepas: I was just pointing out that one of the two major desktops does it that way, not saying we want to do it like mac :-)
[03:39] <klepas> well considering we don't know much about the insides of Apple, i think a designer shouldn't go "it's what they do, and they are very knowledgably about that they do, so i copied them"
[03:39] <TheSheep> msikma: there are a lot of very dedicated ui design proffessionals who will gladly give hints and pointers to anyone willing to implement their ideas -- because most ui designers are kinda evangelical about good interface -- they want it done
[03:39] <kwwii> we are not copying them or anyone
[03:40] <klepas> it's more of a matter of "they did it" as a justification
[03:41] <msikma> TheSheep: that's not really a reply to what I was saying.
[03:41] <kwwii> no, it is a matter of "they did it" so I guess we can test the idea we have - the implementation is totally different anyway
[03:41] <msikma> Unless you were adding that to your statement about Apple firing UI designers.
[03:42] <TheSheep> msikma: sorry, I don;t type as fast as you, it's a reply to your lines from 5 lines ago :)
[03:42] <kwwii> we have never gone further than thinking we would like to test it before
[03:42] <msikma> Anyway, the Mac OS X interface is far from perfect.
[03:43] <msikma> In my opinion, there's one glaring mistake, which is the resizing of windows. I mean, why is there a 16x16 hotspot?
[03:44] <msikma> There are other things too. But generally, I find it a very good interface, though recently suffering from some consistency problems.
[03:44] <kwwii> msikma: not sure if I understand you
[03:44] <msikma> kwwii: you can only resize windows in the bottom-right corner in Mac OS X.
[03:44] <kwwii> ahh, now I get it
[03:44] <msikma> Even with the "metal" skin that implements thick window borders.
[03:44] <kwwii> I used mac before anything else, so for me it was not very wierd
[03:44] <msikma> Yeah
[03:45] <msikma> I can kinda get why it was that way back on the G line of processors.
[03:45] <msikma> It was "just the way it was", with respect to old applications that still had to remain functional.
[03:45] <kwwii> I think it is a matter of them trying to keep things simple to an extreme these days
[03:45] <msikma> But with the Intel switch, they surely could have done something to change it.
[03:46] <msikma> Maybe. They mainly seem to be targeting switchers from Windows these days.
[03:46] <TheSheep> I've recently read the apple's HIG. All they care about is how many pixels is between this button and that border.
[03:46] <msikma> Then it would make sense to implement proper resizing, from all sides of the window.
[03:47] <kwwii> yeah
[03:47] <msikma> TheSheep: HIGs are guidelines for application developers, so it's certainly no surprise that they aren't talking about their design decisions in there. That's proprietary to them.
[03:48] <msikma> I'm pretty sure that leaking that sort of information will get you a suit based on violating trade secrets.
[03:48] <TheSheep> msikma: but they could say "use buttons for this, tabs for that and treeview for that"
[03:48] <TheSheep> msikma: compare it with GNOME hig or (shudder) Vista's HIG
[03:49] <msikma> To be honest, I haven't read those.
[03:49] <msikma> I just briefly had a look at them.
[03:49] <TheSheep> msikma: Vista even has a real-live examples taked from newest MS Office "this is how it shoudn't be done"
[03:49] <TheSheep> taken
[03:50] <msikma> I should read the Gnome guidelines. I wonder what they state.
[03:50] <TheSheep> msikma: they make a lot of important UI decissions for you
[03:50] <msikma> Well, that's good.
[03:50] <TheSheep> I think that too.
[03:51] <msikma> I've seen plenty of applications with no thought put into the design at all, so if people were to simply follow such a document, then at least they can get most of it right, given that they're not /complete/ retards.
[03:51] <TheSheep> and consistent
[03:52] <TheSheep> some decissions are arbitrary
[03:52] <TheSheep> like the order of 'ok' and 'cancel' buttons
[03:52] <msikma> Maybe Apple didn't put sufficient effort into their HIG because there is already a lot of design enthusiasm in the Mac community. If you make a bad-looking application on Mac OS X, you simply aren't going to get away with it unless it's a /really/ vital application.
[03:53] <TheSheep> msikma: it seems to me that they are more concerned with looks than with usability
[03:53] <msikma> This is very healthy, I believe, because people aren't going to like it when they notice that their bad design is causing nobody at all to download their program.
[03:54] <msikma> TheSheep: I find that a bold statement. I don't think that this is the case. Usability has always been an important issue for Apple designers. I don't think that they simply don't care.
[03:55] <TheSheep> msikma: yes, but not all developers of mac apps are employees of apple -- they need a HIG that tells more than "how to make your apps look exquisite"
[03:56] <TheSheep> msikma: I'm sure they have some internal documents for that in apple
[03:57] <msikma> I haven't read their HIG, so I can't comment on its contents, but a lacking HIG should not imply that there aren't any other documents online that one may use for a usability reference. That's part of the Mac community, and the important applications that are developed by it are somehow always well-designed, because otherwise they simply don't get any limelight.
[03:57] <TheSheep> msikma: I'd be very glad if you pointed me to some if you find any :)
[03:58] <TheSheep> msikma: I'm not really into mac community, so I simply don't know where to look
[03:58] <msikma> Apple have an entire team to do formal usability tests, so there's no doubt that their internal developers will be paying that much attention to it. They just work, while others design.
[03:58] <msikma> I've never developed a Mac program, so I don't know either.
[03:59] <TheSheep> msikma: what I complain about is that the expert's work remains a secret of apple -- 3rd party developers are at disadvantage
[03:59] <msikma> That could very well be so.
[03:59] <msikma> I'll read their HIG sometime.
[04:00] <TheSheep> it's pretty boring'
[04:00] <TheSheep> :)
[05:07] <plb_> anyone have problems saving svg images in gimp with gimp-svg plugin installed?
[05:07] <plb_> I can open but not save
[05:17] <TheSheep> plb_: isn't that normal?
[05:18] <TheSheep> plb_: I mean, the svg plugin *imports* the svg file as a raster
[05:18] <TheSheep> plb_: no way to convert that back into vectors
[05:20] <plb_> ah
[05:20] <TheSheep> plb_: use Inkscape to edit svg files
[05:21] <plb_> Yeah, I've been trying to do that lol...never really used it before
[05:21] <plb_> I'm trying to make color variations of the ubuntu logo
[05:22] <plb_> in gimp I just adjust hue or color easily
[05:22] <plb_> inkscape I'm not really sure
[05:23] <TheSheep> well, vector images work a litle bit differently
[05:23] <plb_> I see
[05:24] <TheSheep> plb_: I think you could overlay a colorized, half-opaque outline of the logo, for the quickest effect...
[05:24] <plb_> how do I go about that?
[05:25] <TheSheep> plb_: copy the whole logo, and sum it into a single path -- then just set a transparent, colorized background to it.
[05:26] <plb_> ok got it copied but how do I sum it to a single path
[05:26] <TheSheep> plb_: there is an option in the menu for that
[05:30] <plb_> hrm I just don't see it
[05:30] <kwwii> path --> union
[05:30] <kwwii> but all elements have to be ungrouped first
[05:31] <TheSheep> :/
[05:31] <TheSheep> sorry, I thought it would be simplier
[05:31] <plb_> heh
[05:31] <kwwii> and doing it that way will only work with slight variations
[05:31] <plb_> ok let me put it this way...I just want a black ubuntu logo lol
[05:31] <TheSheep> plb_: of course *THE& way to do it is to edit the svg file with a text editor and to a substitution on the colors used :)
[05:32] <kwwii> the "correct" way of doing it would be to select the object and then change the actual color of it
[05:32] <kwwii> for each object which makes up the logo
[05:32] <plb_> gimp is so much easier ;] 
[05:32] <TheSheep> text editor is faster :)
[05:32] <plb_> heh
[05:33] <kwwii> but you could select the groups and first click on "no fill" (or line) and then add a color for everything
[05:33] <kwwii> grep is your friend :p
[05:33] <kwwii> artwork via sed....ouch
[05:33] <plb_> heh
[05:34] <TheSheep> plb_: svg is an xml format
[05:34] <plb_> forget "created by the gimp" logo...."created by sed"
[05:35] <plb_> ya
[05:36] <plb_> so what are the plans for feisty in terms of art
[05:39] <kwwii> lol
[05:39] <kwwii> good question
[05:39] <kwwii> I'll stick to the easy questions :-)
[05:40] <plb_> heh
[05:42] <TheSheep> I guess the most recent proposition are the amber-like shiny thingies
[05:43] <plb_> huh?
[05:43] <plb_> what is this
[05:44] <TheSheep> plb_: see the wiki
[05:45] <TheSheep> plb_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xubuntu/Artwork/Feisty/Incoming
[05:46] <TheSheep> oops, sorry, wring page
[05:47] <plb_> not bad
[05:48] <TheSheep> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ubun2design/u2Attic/u2Brainstorm
[05:52] <plb_> going for a whole different look?
[05:53] <TheSheep> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ubun2design/u2Specifications/u2Brainstorm/u2BuufFull <-- wow!
[05:53] <plb_> yeah, I saw these icons on gnome-look
[05:53] <plb_> buuf
[05:53] <TheSheep> love them
[05:54] <plb_> are they going to be the default ones for feisty for something
[05:54] <plb_> s/for/or
[05:55] <TheSheep> I don't think so, they are posted as an example of organic look
[05:55] <plb_> Mark should just mattahan to do a custom ubuntu iconset if he likes them so much ;] 
[05:55] <plb_> get*
[05:55] <plb_> pay*
[05:55] <plb_> lol
[05:55] <mhb> well
[05:56] <mhb> I guess they won't become default. Ever.
[05:56] <TheSheep> yeah, they don't scale well and have some accesibility problems :)
[05:56] <plb_> I like tango personally ;] 
[05:57] <TheSheep> tango's nice as a standard
[05:57] <TheSheep> but pretty bleak
[05:57] <mhb> I like most of the icon sets, including Tango, Oxygen and Human.
[05:57] <mhb> but all in a different way
[05:57] <TheSheep> I hate human for the raster directory icon
[05:57] <TheSheep> it's ugly when scaled
[05:58] <plb_> you have seen the new icons for fedora 7?
[05:59] <TheSheep> no
[05:59] <plb_> on gnome-look called echo or something
[05:59] <plb_> not finished though
[05:59] <mhb> if Human were more complete and fully SVG, I would like it more, too.
[06:00] <mhb> Tango is also not very complete - I can't use it on KDE without some icons missing.
[06:00] <TheSheep> mhb: hmm?
[06:01] <TheSheep> mhb: which ones?
[06:03] <plb_> What about metacity/gtk2 theme...going to get changed as well?
[06:03] <TheSheep> plb_: probably
[06:04] <TheSheep> plb_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ubun2design/u2Specifications/u2WindowProposals
[06:05] <mhb> TheSheep: not sure now
[06:06] <plb_> I don't like any of that =\\
[06:06] <TheSheep> plb_: me neither
[06:06] <TheSheep> plb_: fortunately, you are free to change them :)
[06:07] <plb_> doesn't look at all professional
[06:07] <TheSheep> I hate the "pearly" window buttons
[06:07] <mhb> TheSheep: no Configure icon (a wrench in Crystal/Oxygen)
[06:08] <TheSheep> blindly copied from macos
[06:08] <TheSheep> mhb: there is the screwdriver and wrench icon
[06:08] <plb_> http://interfacelift.com/themes-mac/details.php?id=61
[06:08] <plb_> yeah basically lol
[06:10] <TheSheep> follow the leader
[06:11] <_MMA_> troy_s: ping
[06:11] <plb_> I really hope Mark doesn't approve any of those metacity themes lol
[06:12] <mhb> TheSheep: yes, but it's sadly not named well so that it can be used in KDE out-of-the-box :o)
[06:12] <mhb> TheSheep: can't find a "Filter View" icon
[06:13] <TheSheep> mhb: well, since it's the Tango that sets the standard, the bug is obviously in KDE
[06:13] <mhb> TheSheep: heh
[06:14] <mhb> TheSheep: yes, you might say that
[06:14] <mhb> TheSheep: but a standard that doesn't work is kind of worthless to me
[06:15] <kwwii> the freedesktop naming spec will be used in kde4, not kde3
[06:15] <kwwii> and we have a list of icon names we need to add
[06:15] <mhb> kwwii: I know
[06:15] <kwwii> mhb: I was offering that info for TheSheep ;-)
[06:15] <mhb> TheSheep: as kwwii says, it may improve in KDE4 :o)
[06:16] <mhb> TheSheep: it's probably either the packager's fault that it doesn't make a few symlinks to make more icons work in KDE3
[06:16] <mhb> TheSheep: (no either, sorry)
[06:17] <plb_> http://www.padmacolors.org/pics/2005060410.jpg
[06:17] <plb_> something like that would be nice for a gtk2 theme for ubuntu
[06:18] <plb_> it's an osx theme but it's quite nice and fitting for ubuntu I think
[06:18] <mhb> TheSheep: but still the Tango Icon Gallery has several blank places
[06:19] <kwwii> plb_: I guess that has usability problems ;-)
[06:19] <kwwii> but anyway...time for dinner
[06:19] <kwwii> bbl
[06:19] <plb_> never used it myself but I think it fits ubuntu nicely
[06:21] <TheSheep> and it's all I need
[06:34] <mhb> TheSheep: yes, _you_ :o)
[06:35] <TheSheep> mhb: fact is that the less an interface element is distracting, the better it is. Best interfaces are not visible at all.
[06:35] <mhb> TheSheep: I wish all Oxygen, Tango and Human would be complete enough to work on KDE4 :o)
[06:36] <TheSheep> mhb: I thinkt that Tango is open to contributions
[06:36] <mhb> TheSheep: and the latter two to work on KDE3, since both are available now
[06:36] <mhb> TheSheep: it is - if only I had time :o)
[06:37] <TheSheep> mhb: is this the 'oxygen' you mean? http://gnome-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=50716&file1=50716-1.png&file2=50716-2.png&file3=&name=Verglas+Icons+Set+02%3A+Oxygen
[06:38] <mhb> nope
[06:38] <mhb> http://www.oxygen-icons.org/
[06:39] <mhb> http://www.oxygen-icons.org/?cat=3  <-- preview
[06:41] <TheSheep> iteresting
[06:42] <TheSheep> " It is important to represent devices and media storage in a way that user will immediatly recognize them.
[06:42] <TheSheep> lol
[06:42] <TheSheep> and then they draw a "realistic" hdd, as if an average user have ever seen one
[06:46] <troy_s> _mma_ you here?
[06:48] <_MMA_> i am now.
[06:48] <_MMA_> May I PM?
[06:48] <troy_s> absolutely
[07:05] <kwwii> TheSheep: it is more about the printer, and usb hard drives than anything else...kde rarely if ever uses a normal harddrive icon anway :-)
[07:05] <kwwii> cameras, etc. ad nauseum
[07:06] <TheSheep> kwwii: I see
[07:06] <TheSheep> kwwii: not a kde guy, you see :)
[07:06] <kwwii> ;-)
[07:20] <mhb> kwwii: not exactly true
[07:20] <mhb> kwwii: well KDE does not, but Kubuntu does
[07:21] <mhb> kwwii: open /media (if you have Edgy+)
[07:23] <mhb> kwwii: I have one remote and two local partitions there with a hard drive icon
[07:25] <TheSheep> it should be a 'partition icon' ;)
[07:29] <mhb> kwwii: I guess TheSheep may be right. My father can hardly tell what a computer component does (he didn't recognize the RAM card I gave him this Christmas :o)
[07:35] <TheSheep> otoh how do yu draw a partition? :)
[07:36] <mhb> TheSheep: that's the reason why they use a disk metaphor
[07:37] <TheSheep> maybe a file cabinet methaphor woul work better...
[07:37] <TheSheep> the icon is there already
[07:43] <troy_s> Greets TheSheep
[07:43] <troy_s> et mhb
[07:44] <mhb> hi
[07:44] <troy_s> It is worth discussing the metaphors for hardware... we are still using legacy 'files and folders' from bloody xerox star era
[07:45] <troy_s> etc.
[07:46] <TheSheep> I like how Tango pushes it a little farther
[07:46] <TheSheep> not sure about the 'delete' icon, for example
[07:46] <TheSheep> but I guess it's better than a red X
[07:47] <troy_s> Simple X as a symbol might work well.
[07:47] <troy_s> It is a cross between teaching your audience and having the expectation that your audience will know what something means.  The latter is generally folly.
[07:48] <troy_s> As you can never typify something on a global scale.
[07:49] <TheSheep> well, there is this thing called 'affordance'
[07:49] <TheSheep> and it applies to icons too
[07:49] <troy_s> Do you have an art and design education background Sheep?
[07:50] <TheSheep> troy_s: no, I'm an amateur, but I read everything on the subject that I can get my hands on since several years :)
[07:50] <troy_s> That is a lot more than most can say.
[07:50] <troy_s> Affordance is generally more applied to actual physical implementations
[07:50] <troy_s> For example, putting a closed handle on a door implies a pull.
[07:51] <troy_s> Similar I suppose to a 'button' look for something -- implies pushing in an interface.
[07:51] <troy_s> "pushing" rather.
[07:51] <TheSheep> sure, but putting a beveled frame around something implies click :)
[07:51] <TheSheep> right
[07:51] <troy_s> Exactly
[07:51] <troy_s> I agree 100%
[07:51] <TheSheep> then again, there are colors -- "red means stop"
[07:51] <troy_s> Those are cultural centric
[07:51] <troy_s> Unfortunately.
[07:52] <TheSheep> troy_s: well, some are more than others
[07:52] <troy_s> For example, if you compare NA versus say, French walk crossing colours.
[07:52] <TheSheep> troy_s: red/green seems to be pretty instinctive
[07:52] <troy_s> I have a reference somewhere relating to those two very colours...
[07:52] <troy_s> They aren't quite as instinctive as you would like.
[07:52] <TheSheep> troy_s: all the poisonous animals are either red-black, yellow-black or white-black
[07:53] <troy_s> Sounds like someone has read "universal principles of design"
[07:53] <TheSheep> troy_s: high contrast means "watch out"
[07:53] <troy_s> ')
[07:53] <TheSheep> troy_s: nope, didn't read this one
[07:53] <troy_s> Oh you should...
[07:53] <troy_s> great reference.
[07:53] <TheSheep> I will look for it, thanks.
[07:53] <troy_s> But yes, those archetypes are generally evolutionary in nature -- from longstanding traditions.
[07:54] <troy_s> Such as poisonous creatures, etc.
[07:54] <troy_s> Out for a bit... love to chat about that in a bit.
[07:54] <TheSheep> sounds are pretty nice in this regard
[07:55] <TheSheep> great, I'll be waiting here :)
[10:36] <_MMA_> troy_s: Im testing our theme on Feisty. Theres a difference in how the theme is displayed on Edgy vs. Feisty. In Feisty the desktop icons have a color background behind the text where Edgy doesnt.
[10:36] <_MMA_> It uses Murrine. The .deb and theme Im using are the same on Edgy and Feisty. So Im guessing theres something different outside of our packages giving us the difference.