Main toolbar for 2.2

[Orville Bennett]

Bart Cerneels wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 08:41, Nikolaj Hald
> Nielsen<nhnfreespirit at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> snip

>> The new slider style is a way of making the progress slider a bit less
>> "heavy" as the old one is, in my opinion, very massive and draws a lot
>> of focus. Granted, a progress slider should be easily readable, and
>> some people have expressed concerns about the new one. I have tried to
>> make it more easily readable, but I don't know if that is enough to
>> alleviate those concerns. Also, there have been concerns about how
>> well it fits with the rest of style of Amarok. Personally I think it
>> fits quite well and that the old style actually stics out more, but
>> this is jsut my highly subjective opinion.
In making it less heavy you've made it too light. I don't see what 
you're trying to fix either and this change just feels like you're 
over-thinking the issue.
As it stands the new slider is a slim, blue sliver with a transparent 
circle used to track it. Accessibility fail. Big time. My young eyes can 
see it just fine, and like how it looks, but I can imagine Granny 
Goodness might have some trouble seeing this. Or plain old folks with 
poor eyesight.

>>
>> In any case, these are the options I see for choosing hat to ship with 2.2.0:
>>
>>
>> 1) Ship the old toolbar with the old slider style. All is as it were,
>> except for a few features that I added to the progress slider that are
>> independent of rendering mode.
>>
>> 2) Ship the old toolbar with the new slider style. If we choose this
>> one, I think we should paint the volume slider in this style as well
>> (perhaps with a different color for the part left of the knob) as it
>> looks pretty disjoint currently.
>>
>> 3) New slim toolbar with new slider.
>>
>> 4) New slim toolbar with the old slider style.
>>
>> 5) Allow users to choose (like currently), and figure out some
>> combination of which toolbar uses which slider (example, old toolbar
>> uses old slider, new toolbar uses new slider). The main issue with
>> this approach is that we would really need to rename the new toolbar
>> from Main "Toolbar NG" to something like "Main Toolbar - Slim", but we
>> are currently in string freeze...
>>
>> One general issue that I still need to look at with the new slider
>> style is how bookmarks are painted, as the current svg's used for
>> making bookmarks in the current track does not look good with the new
>> slider.
>>
>> Personally, I prefer option 3), with option 4) as my second choices.
>> Let me hear what you guys think!
>>
>
> option 5 is a possibility because the translators will be able to
> change that string to whatever we want. We will just need to give them
> instructions. Outside of stringfreeze we do this via i18nc. The only
> people who would see the untranslated string are people who use no
> translation at all, which is not default on most distros.
I'm for option 5 as well because I dislike the overlapping icons.
I'm quite aware however that there might be folks out there who like 
them for whatever weird reasons and I don't think they should be 
punished for there poor taste :-)


>
> My personal opinion is that that the old toolbar should stay the
> default and the NG as option. My laptops is also vertical resolution
> challenged and I don't have a problem with the hight of the toolbar.
> I've also gotten used to the style and can live with the open spaces
> because I expect the visualization to be there one day.
>
> If we ever make a netbook remix it can be the default there. I can't
> tell if the volume button is difficult to use with a touchpad since I
> have the one on my thinkpad disabled. It works fine with both mouse
> and trackpoint and changing the application volume is not something I
> do often.
My thoughts exactly. Except that I have used it with my touchpad. Middle 
mouse volume changes works just fine.


So I vote #5, but vote against the new slider in its current 
permutation, unless we can have someone who actually has poor eyesight 
use it and give it the green light (after all, I'm just guessing here).