Question on icon colors

[agryson]

A feature request would be to look at the draft snap toolbar next. The activated non-activated contrast is a big challenge depending on OS/desktop theme.

Sure thing.

Little dev workflow question, do you think I should do pull requests toolbar by toolbar or workbench by workbench? (I would tend towards the latter)

[triplus]

Hi @agryson.

I do see new cut and curvature icon as an improvement but as for import/export i am not convinced.

I'm hoping to minimise changes to icon geometry in this project to prevent deprecating documentation & tutorials (incidentally, that reduces the subjectiveness).

I feel that this is wrong approach and probably Yorik contributed to it when he gave such signal. In my opinion you should update the wiki icons in appropriate places (command icon and on artwork page) when you do the changes as you plan to do a lot of changes. If you don't do that somebody else will have to do it in the future.

And as for changing just color. Likely that will not be enough for import/export icons therefore change the geometry.

There is too much elements in the icon and likely that is the problem. At least one can be removed. And as you plan to go over all workbenches look for other import/export icons first as if you will finish the job and there won't be any consistency between import/export icons in all workbenches i feel the task wont be as successful as it could be. And therefore i guess somebody else would need to go over all of them again to achieve that goal in the future.

P.S. As for the pace. Once things settle biweekly (around every two weeks) report and feedback phase (if there is anything to share) likely won't stress the whole process too much.

[agryson]

you should update the wiki icons in appropriate places (command icon and on artwork page) when you do the changes as you plan to do a lot of changes.

Sorry for the confusion, I fully intend to update the wiki in parallel, when I refer to deprecation, I'm talking more about hard copies, screenshots and video tutorials.

won't be any consistency between import/export icons in all workbenches i feel the task wont be as successful as it could be. And therefore i guess somebody else would need to go over all of them again to achieve that goal in the future.

I understand, and as you'll remember from the start of this thread, I want to change the geometries too. But over the course of the discussion I began to understand that it really is two projects:

Project "Align"

• Align all existing icons to Tango/FreeCAD guidelines (as much as they exist) - this provides a solid base from which we can work from in Project Upgrade.
• Even good icons need to be recommitted, since I'm adding a power of two pixel grid to the inkscape svg's. Anyone using inkscape should then see the pixel grid when they come back in Project Upgrade and also see what I'm doing, how I'm doing it, how I'm aligning things, etc.
• Avoid deprecation of non-editable resources, avoid forking icons between 0.16/0.17 (when does wiki get updated with changed geometry?)
• On a toolbar by toolbar or a workbench by workbench schedule, submit pull requests and update wiki after merge.

Project "Upgrade"

• On a tool by tool or function by function basis, collect all relevant icons and discuss potential improvements
• Change these tools'/functions' icons based on the discussion and submit those icons/that icon in a pull request
• Update wiki [edit: or not, could lead to forking icons - need to see when wiki is updated with new geometry]
• Go to step one

Project Align is a one-shot alignment of all icons to the existing guidelines.
Project Upgrade would take much much longer.

Trying to do both in parallel (in my experience) would prevent us from doing either properly.

Sure, I'll "lose" some of my own time, but I consider it time well spent finding all the icons, learning about the analogies already in use and learning more about how development is done here.

[triplus]

Sorry for the confusion, I fully intend to update the wiki in parallel, when I refer to deprecation, I'm talking more about hard copies, screenshots and video tutorials.

I see.

Well evolution and improvements in my opinion when justified outweigh this. As in tutorials, screenshots and documentation about FreeCAD 0.17 all this will be included.

But over the course of the discussion I began to understand that it really is two projects...

This is probably way overcomplicated plan you have. Just go after what you plan to do in a single phase (color and geometry changes). Doing it twice would likely over stress the process. And you said you plan to do all of them. I don't feel that is a good plan. Do the ones that really need it and changes (color and/or geometry improvements) do make some real difference for now. As anything beyond that would be hard to justify.

Hint: Load all workbenches and in IconThemes module enable Designer Mode. That will give you a nice overview of the icons. Mark the ones that really need color and geometry adjustments and changes do make a difference. And focus on project like the mentioned polyline icon where you can achieve results that are likely justified and do make sense as that was established through discussions over longer periods of time in the past. And maybe you will be able to detect "groups" of icons from different workbenches in need of better consistency. Therefore i do feel such smaller scale and more focused projects make much more sense compared to projects like lets "slightly re-paint" all icons including the ones where the changes will be hard to justify.

[mario52]

hi
There have already been such discussions in the past my proposal was a XnView type system and many others that allows anyone to choose and make its own models:
Icons and Overall Look et Sketcher - color blind user palette?
Tomorrow another enthusiastic user will want to change everything and it left again to zero icons, screen shot, wiki .....

il y a déjà eu de telles discussions dans le passé ma proposition était un système type XnView et bien d'autres qui permet à quiconque de choisir et fabriquer ses propres modèles :
Icons and Overall Look et Sketcher - color blind user palette?
demain un autre enthousiaste utilisateur va vouloir tout changer et c'est reparti à zéro icônes, wiki .....



Excuse me for my cent
mario

[triplus]

As the need to think about this has emerged this is how i see it for now. As eager designer interested in improving FreeCAD UX experience you need to master this processes first (compiling skill not needed):

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=18733&start=20#p146482

Or you can wait for command icon request and do just the design related work part. Large scale plans are ATM more suitable to be explored as 3rd Party icon packs:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=17901

As you have the freedom to take any path and the time to get the task done is therefore reduced substantially. Therefore @agryson you could for example change geometry or icon color as you see it fit without much further ado.

Doing such work directly in FreeCAD or moving part of the work from the icon pack in FreeCAD as default experience. This is welcomed but such projects should be done on smaller scale and need to be discussed and in general they need more time to get done.

Such procedure should allow design contribution flow to increase in the future compared to what we have now and current bottlenecks exposed in this thread and unneeded stress to be removed from the process. Once this won't do anymore i guess then we can start thinking about forum section related to FreeCAD design effort we talked about years ago again. And likely more designers (at least partially working together) will be able to contribute to large scale task and plans and more direct approach to start making more sense. ATM we are in my opinion not there yet.

@mario52

Yes both choice and good default experience is what we would like to have (more of it) for FreeCAD in the future.

[agryson]

This is probably way overcomplicated plan you have. Just go after what you plan to do in a single phase (color and geometry changes). Doing it twice would likely over stress the process.

But I see several disadvantages to that approach:

• Geometry change is a "breaking change", leading to a host of issues that each need to be dealt with (0.16 docs vs 0.17 docs in wiki, video tutorials etc.)
• Discussions on subjective issues will slow down work on objective issues (outline is non-optional in Tango docs, alignment to a power of two pixel grid is objectively required, etc.)
• To properly consider the icon's meaning I'd need to go through each and every icon first anyway, so it would actually increase the workload to want to do them in parallel
• Working on unifying similar icons requires me to do the work by function/purpose rather than by location (toolbar or workbench) which would lead to visually inconsistent results within a workbench or toolbar during the project
• ...

I understand what you're saying, but my experience with working on legacy interfaces is that rigidly applying a set of objective guidelines is a necessary first step for efficient work later on. Also, I really don't mind spending the time to do it. In a single evening I managed to clean up half a workbench of icons that haven't been touched in 3-5 years, and I learnt a lot doing it. I'm confident that (maybe in a new thread) I could advance at a steady, sustainable pace, integrating feedback as I go.

(P.S. Thanks for the hint!)

[agryson]

Large scale plans are ATM more suitable to be explored as 3rd Party icon packs:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=17901

This may be the approach I end up taking, I'll finish the mesh workbench and then see if there's a desire by the community to merge or instead for me to work in my corner providing a progressively growing icon theme until something more mature is available for a single pull request.

[triplus]

But I see several disadvantages to that approach:

We changed PartDesign workflow in FreeCAD 0.17. Therefore improving some default icons (for the ones that it makes sense) by adapting the geometry instead of only changing them in a way we still have unsatisfying result... Not comparable. As for the time indeed. If you are extremely talented it should likely take you around 2 days per icon (or more). Sometimes it takes more time (months or sometimes years). As for the icon pack if you can do it in a day go for it and it will be much easier for you and for the potential evaluation process if all or some icons should replace the default ones. As for focusing on individual workbench toolbar instead of for example some icon geometry consistency between workbenches. My opinion is geometry consistency is a good thing but i guess other solution can work too if done correctly.

P.S. Note that everything i wrote is more or less my opinion. Most of it based on past experience and learning on how things work in this area regarding FreeCAD. In my opinion the process improved in the past but as stated earlier i doubt we are there yet. For such quick and large scale approach to improve things. As i can't predict the results i will focus my involvement on smaller scale design related projects or if you plan to do an icon pack i can try it out to see how it goes. As for the rest its up to you to decide and see what works for you.

Large scale plans are ATM more suitable to be explored as 3rd Party icon packs:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=17901

This may be the approach I end up taking, I'll finish the mesh workbench and then see if there's a desire by the community to merge or instead for me to work in my corner providing a progressively growing icon theme until something more mature is available for a single pull request.

Yes that wasn't possible in the past and now it is. Therefore lets try that out first on large scale design related goals.

[agryson]

Another little update, almost finished the mesh workbench, just the Regular Solids and the mesh_pipette to finish, but wanted to share.

Before [left] | After [right]

BeforeAfter.png (116.72 KiB) Viewed 1660 times