Hi again,
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:54 -0700
spencerone@??? wrote:
> > We currently have here:
> >
> > - windows camouflage (might be removed in next Tails): make Tails look
> > like windows to look less suspicious in places like Internet cafes
>
> I am not sure if you mean temporarily or permanently. However, I think
> 'Windows Camouflage' is an important tool and that it is important to
> accommodate for more.
>
The point here is not that we think camouflage is not useful, but that
it takes a lot of time to develop and maintain and we decided it was not
hight priority enough to be a requirement for next Tails releases.
> > I'm not sure to understand what you mean here. You're explaining why
> > you think there should be no section icons?
> >
>
> Yes. Section Label = No Icon. Line-item Label = Yes Icon. To
> summarize:
>
> • The icon/text combination is the most universal in softlists and seems
> most appropriate for the line items.
> • Tails currently uses colored and monochromatic icons to accompany line
> items for almost every list, and displays no icon for section labels.
> • The visual conflict that arises between icons with different alignment
> with such close proximity, ex., the Section vs Line-item labels, becomes
> first a visual beauty issue, then a visual clarity one.
>
OK
> > Option 1A looks very clean to me. 1B would be fine but looks less
> > "modern" and
> > GNOMEy.
> >
>
> 1A it is.
>
> >
> > When we'll have polished all remaining questions, I think we should:
> >
> > - make a summary of the decisions so that we can ask others to review
> > them
> >
>
> Here is a brief surface level explanation[0]. However, if people don't
> think it is too much to dig into, we can certainly write an email and
> list every decision by title, list each of the options to choose from
> below the respective title, include a sentence or two describing why we
> chose one over another, and include a image sample to better visualize,
> but that might be too much.
>
We should do that in the blueprint[1], and them make a call for
comments/revisions of this blueprint.
[1]:
https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/greeter_revamp_UI/
> >
> > - have a mockup that I can build a prototype implementation from
> >
>
> Here ya go[1]. If people are cool with the decisions, this is good to
> go.
Wow, that's great!
> Would you want a Redline document with stuff called out?
What is a redline document?
> >
> > - dig into the detailed wording and icons for each option
> >
>
> The words and icons should be quite suitable as logical foundations to
> build off of. The styling of the wording and the icons will be cool.
>
> Does Tails have a dedicated graphic designer like the Tor Project does?
>
Not really. I know sajolida worked in icons for the website quite a
lot, so it might be good to ask theml.
> Also, I did my best to size everything to GNOME 3.14 standards
That's great
> but had
> trouble locating anything definitively accurate. Screenshots from Tails
> didn't align with the buttons available from the GNOME website though I
> couldn't find info on the buttons being updated. Neither of these
> aligned with images found online, nor with people's comments. But the
> spacing and text should be close if not accurate.
>
That is because current tails is based on GNOME 3.8. But we are now
developing for a version of Tails based on Debian Jessie, and GNOME
3.14, which corresponds to what is available in GNOME website.
> Would you please direct me to the proper source of button and dialog
> window sizes?
>
GNOME HIG[2] is the right source, but don't worry too much, as for the
real prototype and program, I'll use a software that does most of the
sizing automatically according to these requirements (don't worry we
can fine-tune things where we want).
[2]:
https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/
> >
> > I'm looking forward to see all this for real. It looks very promising
> > to me!
> >
>
> Yay! Thanks for all the help!!
>
Thank YOU!
Cheers
