[Bf-funboard] Replacing OB, SCE, IP, etc, with icons

[William Reynish]

Thanks for the comments guys! It's good to get some
feedback.


> > Basicly it could work like the XSI layers system
>which
>> is very simple to use but also extremely powerful.
>> Here is a screen showing the XSI layers system:
>> http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/layers_xsi.jpg
>I think the wording for XSI is pretty good... I like
>it being called 
>"view"
>rather than "visibility" since "view" is more
>specific. It means that
>something can be rendered without being visible in
>the view though....

Yeah, "View" is good. Dunno, maybe "Preview" would be
better.

>(which has its pros and cons) "Sel." is ok, as long
>as there is a 
>tooltip -
>otherwise the user might think it >means
"selected"rather than 
>"selectable".
>It is better than ghost since "selectable" would be
>easier to 
>understand for
>many users (like myself).

Yes I am not so fond of "ghost". Sel. seems ok,
although if we could get away with writing
"selectable" I think that would be the optimal choise.


>> It shows the Scene manager in
>> Hirearchy mode which displays datablocks and
objects
>> in an organised hirearhy with the standard Blender
>> icons for objects, textures etc.
>Note that it is spelt "hierarchy" and I'm not sure if
>that is the best 
>name.

Woops, I'll try to remember it is "hierarchy" from now
on. XSI calls it "Explorer", Wings calls it
"outliner", Cinema4D calls it ...

It has lots and lots of different names in different
programs. What name would you prefer?


>> (maybe it should have
>> arrows instead of "+" and "-" to make it more
>> consistant with the rest of Blender.)
>"+" and "-" are a little more straight forward I
>think ("+" means "show 
>me
>more" (expand) and "-" means "show me
>less"(collapse)), and seem to 
>have a
>larger clickable area.
>
>> I have organised
>> things as they are in Blender (the material
>datablock
>> is attached to the mesh datablock for example).
Here
>> it is:
>>
>http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/scenemanager_hirearchy.jpg
>I like it... and how about if you click on anything
>(like a texture, 
>etc) it
>takes you to the texture buttons and makes sure the
>object is 
>selected...

Yes, cerinately it was the idea that you could select
objects with this screen. I actually hadn't though of
latting it jump to the coresponding window (in the
buttonswindow) when selecting different datatypes.
VERY good idea actually!


>and you could copy textures from one object to
>others, etc. 

Yes that would be good. It could work like
copying/pasting IPO curves (I think that that should
work through a menu, not icons (currently has two
arrows, one for copying and one for pasting) - in both
this and the IPO window though.).


Maybe it 
>could
>say which channel they're in (1-8) since I think that
>is important. 
>e.g.
>TE:(1) Carpet_tex. It could also say what material
>number something is. 
>That
>way you could copy the 3rd texture from something and
>put it into the 
>right
>place of another material... 

Yes that would be needed to visualise things properly.
All the textures need to be visible otherwise how do
we choose which of a materials textures is displayed
here? They should all be displayed ofcourse!

On the other hand that >idea probably would
>involve lots of empty texture channels, which would
>waste quite a lot 
>of
>space.

It could only show channels that contained textures...


>BTW, what do you mean by "Schematic"?

I meant "Oops Schematic", but I think calling it
"Schematic" would be better. Its clearer actually, and
other applications call it schematic.


>I got this idea after looking at William's mockup:
>http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/scenemanager_hirearchy.jpg
>
>In the mockup, each abbreviation (OB, SCE, IP, etc)
>has a different 
>icon.
>Icons could be made for all of the remaining types
>such as SCR, then 
>all of
>those abbreviations could be removed where-ever they
>exist in blender 
>and
>replaced with icons.
>Advantages:
>1. No more obscure abbreviations like "IP" (in the
>IPO window the 
>animation
>doesn't even have to have interpolation)
>2. Non-native English speakers don't need to rely on
>abbreviations 
>which
>might have nothing to do with the word used in their
>native language.
>particularly coloured 
>pictures
>than telling the different SCE and SCR.
>4. It is clear which part of the text is editable. In
>the mockup, SCE:1
>appears to be editable (it is all the same font,
>inside the box), yet 
>only
>the "1" is editable.
>5. It looks prettier.
>6. Less space is taken up, particularly in the main
>header (which 
>contains
>SCE and SCR)
>(webpage about the main header)
>http://members.ozemail.com.au/~wenke/blender/blender->mainheader.htm
>
>Since existing icons could be used, the user would be
>able to figure 
>out
>what icon means what. I don't think there is an
>existing icon for "SCR" 
>but
>that could just be a picture of a computer monitor -
>perhaps with a 
>blue
>screen. Also, tooltips could be used to explain what
>the icon means.
>There could be some confusion about the same icons
>being used in 
>multiple
>places - some are clickable and some aren't... but
>the user should be 
>able
>to handle that.


I actually like your idea. Also your mockup seems to
look ok. The scene icon looks like the Render icon
though, and the screen icon looks unclear. But a good
idea I think!


>> I suggest er
>> add a new window tyoe instead on the old Oops
Window
>> called "Scene manager", "Scene inspector" or "Scene
>> explorer" or something similar. In this window,
>there
>> could be three modes (either visualised through
>> togglebuttons or through a dropdown menu): Layers,
>> Hirearchy and Schematic.
>
>No dropdown, please! I think there should be real
>tabs 
>_above_ the tree. The 3 modes are like headlines, so 
>they should come first.

Yeah I though of this. But you know in the 3D window
you could say the Mode seletor should be at the top.
It needs to be consistant to a certain degree. ANd
anyway, you can move the header to the top manually
should you want to. 


>> Basicly it could work like the XSI layers system
>which
>> is very simple to use but also extremely powerful.
>> Here is a screen showing the XSI layers system:
>> http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/layers_xsi.jpg
>
>Do they offer any shortcuts?

Not that I know of. How would shortcuts work in a
layers system? Are you talking about using M for move
layer? Because this could easily be done with a new
system I think.

The XSI screen was just to give a peek of how it is in
other much used software. We can always add stuff like
shortcuts when we implement it in Blender.




Yahoo! Mail (http://dk.mail.yahoo.com) - Gratis: 6 MB lagerplads, spamfilter og virusscan