<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I prefer 5 for its visual and semantic clarity and clear use of colors
to vibrantly differentiate the options. <br>
Have you considered, the following hybrid approach:<br>
* use 5.2's desktop image instead of the monitor (monitor might imply
more than is appropriate such as resolution control, refresh rate<br>
* using 5's colors/graphics that are currently inside the monitors but
putting them inside the desktop<br>
* using the wrench instead of the magic wand in the "Custom" option to
add that visual representation of the intended meaning<br>
Mirco Müller wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1190669068.22078.7.camel@vaio" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Am Dienstag, den 25.09.2007, 05:06 +0800 schrieb Joel Bryan Juliano:
<pre wrap="">Nice work! I vote for screenshot 5 and 6.2, I think the 5.2 is also
nice, but it needs a better icon representation, since the desktop
icon can also represents the user's desktop folder or the "show
desktop" applet which makes it redundant.
Screenshot 5 is nice for its colors and ability work on dark and bright
backgrounds alike. The 6.2 one is nice regarding the idea with the
wrench and different layout of stars to convey the different effects
levels. A mix of both approaches would be best.
<pre wrap="">Also, the ccsm needs more focus, since currently it's really too
"technical", I mean there's a category for "general", "desktop",
"extras", "window management", and more and so, that I think can be
consolidated into a more unified and easy to understand way. For ccsm,
HIG is a must.
HIG-wise ccsm is a mess, no doubt there. But currently the best we
have. But right now I'm more in serious bug-hunting mode, than doing a
HIG-compliant ccsm replacement from scratch (design-wise).