[Bf-committers] Re: Blendergo - layers proposal

[GSR]

Short version: Is Blender going for full UI redesign (buttons,
workflow, etc) or just a (full?) UI examination with local changes?

Long version:

Hi,
rwenzlaff at soylent-green.com (2007-03-02 at 2107.23 -0500):
> > > http://blendergo.mudpuddle.co.nz/proposals/Layers2.pdf
> 
> One thin is if you are doing all this work to re-vamp the layers, why limit 
> them to 20?  Maybe only the first 20 in the list get a button on the header, 
> (so you should be able to move them up and down).

Shortcuts, compatibility... I guess. OTOH, I do not see where it says
the limit should be 20, but I see it proposes starting with single
layer and adding (I hope it does not mean I can not reach layer 11
without adding 2-10 first, as sometimes I use layer 11 for things
related to 1). Dynamic shortcuts (specially in case it means changing
as you remove and add new layer) end being a pest or you end limiting
yourself to a set you remember from one use to another.
 
[...]

> I think the Blender concept of Layers is so radically different from 
> other apps that trying to borrow from their Layer manager is a just 
> asking for trouble.

The doc talked about too many 2D apps (in which layers are stacks of
transparent plastic, so to speak) while only one other 3D app was
referenced. What about onions? Oh, wait, the point is "Blender layers"
(originally it was some kind of non exclusive object grouping that
dictated some special relations), not anything that is linked to the
word "layer". ;]

I remember LW and Blender shared some ideas about layers, and I just
quickly looked for some info about the fact (it seems they had only 10
some versions ago and now 99*10, for example):
http://www.webdesign.org/web/3d-graphics/tutorials/lightwave-7.5-beginners-guide.6294.html

What about other 3D apps? Anything to learn from them (in positive and
negative ways)? And specially, how to fit all the concepts into
Blender style instead of hammering anything cos <fill the blank with
silly reasons instead of "it makes sense for Blender internal
consistency">? The things have been running amok for some versions,
and IMHO that should stop ASAP. There are (or has been proposed) light
groups, layer only lamps, unselectable layers, always render, render
layers, object groups, this and that... it is getting complex and too
intermixed, without clear rules of what happens (and why) when
something overlaps.

What should be the purpose of layers (remember, Blender layers)? And
for the other things that have been mixed with them? What is the
target, big changes or small changes? By extension, what is the target
of the UI project? These questions should be answered first, IMO.

If a new system (for layers) is desired, what only matters is loading
old files, the rest is "free", it just has to fit into the new global
scheme. If instead an evolved system is prefered, old layers should be
just slightly improved with things that fit and make sense (like names
or colour/shape based feedback). The problems extend to whole UI
project in any case and note that any approach means dropping things,
for different reasons (radical redesign vs removing what is there
without real integration).

GSR