[Bf-funboard] Re: Buttons organisation guidelines

[Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero]

flaw@misaligned.net (2003-10-15 at 1002.04 -0400):
> Now that I think about it, for the guidelines, I would suggest that we
> also have a notion of what has priority.  What I mean is that if a UI
> element can possibly placed in two different locations based on the
> guidelines, then one guideline should have a greater importance than the
> other.  For instance, if Random UI Element "Foo" can be placed on the
> right because it comes at the end of the workflow (workflow placement),
> but can also be placed on the left because it is a setting (consistancy
> placement, for lack of a better name), we should be able to go the
> guideline and see something a priority list of the kinds of placements
> like so:
> 
> 1) Consistancy
> 2) Workflow
> 3) Grouping
> 4) Something else
> 5) Blah
> 
> Based on that, Foo would be placed on the left because consistancy has a
> higher priority than workflow (this can be debated, I'm just giving it
> as an example for now).
> 
> Comments?

Well, you seem to see consistency as different than workflow. IMO
workflow is above it, and includes it. If you are working on
something, I think you will find more consistent to have the related
things in one place, not all over the place. In other apps that could
mean a dialog (all the settings and some buttons to make it work), but
in Blender I think it means "place near". Your raw consistancy
proposal, in other apps, would mean different dialogs (eek!).

Conclusion: we better find a clear classification soon. And for all
those that complain about the mess Blender is now, I would recommend
to get an old manual (the 1.5 or 1.8) or just try some old versions,
when it made a bit more of sense. IMO the latest ones follow a "let
push it anywhere", and done by multiple people, so it is even worse.

GSR