[12:24] <darkmatter> wooo! nailed the base environment metaphor and workflow! *dances*
[12:28] <thorwil> darkmatter: the base environment metaphor doesn't need to be able to move?
[12:28] <darkmatter> thorwil: haha. that's not what I mean you goof :p
[12:35] <thorwil> darkmatter: so what is your base environment metaphor?
[12:39] <darkmatter> thorwil: well, same as it was years ago (activities), the important part is just _how_ it works (as far as how the "desktop" or - whatever name you wanna give it - interaction works). it's also  (basically) document-centric (I use document loosely. basically the tools aren't important, it's the tasks and the stuff)
[12:49] <darkmatter> thorwil: at the desktop level, an activity is analogous to a workspace. one by default, sorta generic. the main components are the shelf (I nicknamed it pandora for organizational purposes), a "run command" that is sorta a hybrid of of ubiquity(and its predecessor enzo) and do/quicksilver/whatever, and of course the rest of the screen (which is used to host replicants like pandora does (replicants would basically seem to most like wid
[12:50] <thorwil> most like wi ...?
[12:50] <darkmatter> like widget or such, but they're not, and they're more deeply integrated into the environment)
[12:51] <thorwil> ever since i used rhino 3d, i have been think of an ever-present commandline on the screen
[12:54] <thorwil> there's no strict workspace/activities relation the way i use what gnome offers now.
[12:55] <darkmatter> thorwil: that's kinda like how I envision the run thing. it can connect to anything (even to run map commands from the net and send directions to someones cell or whatever) it's used as a command line, search filter (for switching activities/documents/whatever), can be used in window management, yada yada. I want it to be more "human" in general (thus the enzo/ubiqity comparison)
[12:56] <thorwil> darkmatter: sure. i think the tricky part is handling the context the commands will be executed with
[12:59] <darkmatter> thorwil: mines not strict as such, but it can be (it's a matter of how the shelf functions in correlation to the activities). basically in each activity/space the shelf has it's own config (through pinning and whatnot) so switching changes the objects on the shelf to reflect the current activity (of course that's the "multispace poweruser!!111!!oneONEelEVeNN!" stuff that most wouldn't care about. generally people are happy with one sp
[13:01] <darkmatter> thorwil: yup. it'll take a lot of work (if it sees the light of day) to get the context right. some would be related to the view (like in"expo" mode it would find an item, switch to the space it's in and bring it to the foreground)
[13:03] <darkmatter> thorwil: most my mockups are on paper, but I can type out the how and why later (may take a day or so :P) and pastebin it or something. theres a _lot_ of stuff that would take hours to explain over irc
[13:03] <thorwil> darkmatter: better document it once and proper
[13:05] <darkmatter> but in general, aside from being powerful, it's _simple_ (overall). the actuall user interaction and interface design (including app-level) is being designed to be "this is so easy a retarded monkey could use it" :D
[13:07] <darkmatter> and even though it's "different" it conforms to a certain degree to conventional tactics (as in there's no drastic "OMG! WTF!" reaction from users. even in early planning I wanted drop in replacement, just use friendliness)
[13:11]  * thorwil goes to cut a hedge
[13:12] <darkmatter> so the guiding principle is "conceptual simplicity, structural complexity"
[20:53] <nysosym> hi there
[22:00] <coz_> hey guys