- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

ui colors again

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > Perhaps it would be good to be able to change colors at runtime, especially > since we already allow the panel size to change. I'll have a look at that > color chooser that fltk has. Here's a quick little toy:

Dec. 30, 2012

show_url pref

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 07:25:59PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Since it's been broken throughout the dillo3 era, the other day I made it > so that you can't disable it -- and now I'm wondering what the value is in > even having the pref. Removing Location doesn't give us room for anything > more important. It's kind of like having a show_viewport preference. Yes, most probably nobody cares. ;) (nobody has missed it in all these time) Hide_panels is a different thing (much more useful). Probably it'd be good to remove the pref. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Dec. 30, 2012

show_url pref

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Since it's been broken throughout the dillo3 era, the other day I made it so that you can't disable it -- and now I'm wondering what the value is in even having the pref. Removing Location doesn't give us room for anything more important. It's kind of like having a show_viewport preference.

Dec. 30, 2012

ui colors again

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > * We may suggest some combinations in the web site or dillorc. > > This way, the traditional look can easily be set, new ones can > be created (suggested) and a default scheme voted. It would be nice if we had a sort of...minimal covering set of the different sorts of color schemes that a person could "sensibly" (whatever that can mean) want for the sake of testing. I imagine the world of graphic design must have such a thing (if only I knew the right words to find it)... Perhaps it would be good to be able to change colors at runtime, especially since we already allow the panel size to change. I'll have a look at that color chooser that fltk has. > Finally, @all, please recieve my best wishes for the new year > that's about to start! ;-) :)

Dec. 30, 2012

ui colors again

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > The default theme in dillo is kind of a consensus over the > years. This is, when changes were proposed, the most voted one > (or less objected) got to be the default (same for the website). I think we have a strong tendency to defer to you in general and end up with what Jorge likes, even if that's not your intention particularly. And of course the community is so tiny these days that we often get one vote or zero votes on something, dispiritingly enough. Last year, the opinions presented on the list on ripping out the hardcoded colors were: Benjamin brought it up, iirc, having done so with his fork. I liked the idea. Johannes liked the idea. > * The default colors should not be changed without consensus. It should be quite similar except that there's some white where we customarily have a greenish color. I'm not too crazy about the white, but I didn't want to make it the same greenish merely because it's what we had because then we'd all not notice it and/or accept it as the way it's always been. (The white of course being fltk's default.) I'm thinking that we come up with defaults for foreground and the two backgrounds and maybe selection color, and then put in contrast() and lighter() and darker() as necessary for visibility and pleasant appearance, but base everything on that set of colors instead of hardcoding anything to green or blue or whatever. > * The patch should provide a way to keep the previous default > (i.e. How do I get my colors/pixmaps back?) > > PS: WRT the second point, I find the inactive pixmaps too > "live" for my taste (and thus prefer the pixmaps). I initially wanted to make the inactive pixmaps look better with greyish or darkish backgrounds, and I used Fl_Image's inactive(), which just dims the pixmap down with some background color. But they didn't look inactive enough, so I went the desaturate() route after all, which is rather like using the pixmaps... So I haven't come up with anything that I'm happy enough with to really want to _advocate_ for. > PS2: Is good to have the input/dialog backgrounds configurable > but the defaults should be voted.

Dec. 30, 2012

ui colors again

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:52:37AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 03:55:34AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > I wrote: > > > Today I dug up the old ui colors patch from last September, ripped out the > > > part that used system colors as defaults that was a problem*, and played > > > around with it a little. I really like configurable colors, so, since I > > > haven't heard anyone say anything like feature freeze yet, I'll make another > > > push for this thing. > > > > Committed. > > > > - I changed the inactive icon appearance some more. > > - By default it's using the fltk default colors. > > - It might be nice to be able to specify the selection color, too. > > -1 > > The default colors or theme are not easy to define, everybody has > his personal preferences, and there's no single scheme that pleases > everyone. > > The default theme in dillo is kind of a consensus over the > years. This is, when changes were proposed, the most voted one > (or less objected) got to be the default (same for the website). > > This policy works ok for us and is widely used. > > Personally I don't like the change, but I do understand that > other users, may find it fits better. > > So my points are: > > * The default colors should not be changed without consensus. > * The patch should provide a way to keep the previous default > (i.e. How do I get my colors/pixmaps back?) > > PS: WRT the second point, I find the inactive pixmaps too > "live" for my taste (and thus prefer the pixmaps). > PS2: Is good to have the input/dialog backgrounds configurable > but the defaults should be voted. Just trying to make my points a bit clearer, and after playing a bit more with the patch: * +1 to making it configurable (as now) * +1 to add a dillorc option for the second parameter in color_average() call (e.g. setting it to 0.1f makes for the same look as with the handmade pixmaps, so they could be removed). Adding a parameter for the first one may also help (although it's not a priority). * We may suggest some combinations in the web site or dillorc. This way, the traditional look can easily be set, new ones can be created (suggested) and a default scheme voted. Finally, @all, please recieve my best wishes for the new year that's about to start! ;-) -- Cheers Jorge.-

Dec. 30, 2012

CAPI ignores download requests when not in cache or handled by the downloads DPI.

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

I wondered why "Save link as" silently failed on some of my local web pages if I had not already visited the link. It turns out they were "file:///" links and "Save link as" sends a download request which the CAPI silently ignores if the URL is not cached and is not handled by the downloads DPI. I added a MSG_WARN to log this but haven't changed any behaviour. I still found it surprising and was wondering if it could be improved? Regards, Jeremy Henty

Dec. 30, 2012

ui colors again

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 03:55:34AM +0000, corvid wrote: > I wrote: > > Today I dug up the old ui colors patch from last September, ripped out the > > part that used system colors as defaults that was a problem*, and played > > around with it a little. I really like configurable colors, so, since I > > haven't heard anyone say anything like feature freeze yet, I'll make another > > push for this thing. > > Committed. > > - I changed the inactive icon appearance some more. > - By default it's using the fltk default colors. > - It might be nice to be able to specify the selection color, too. -1 The default colors or theme are not easy to define, everybody has his personal preferences, and there's no single scheme that pleases everyone. The default theme in dillo is kind of a consensus over the years. This is, when changes were proposed, the most voted one (or less objected) got to be the default (same for the website). This policy works ok for us and is widely used. Personally I don't like the change, but I do understand that other users, may find it fits better. So my points are: * The default colors should not be changed without consensus. * The patch should provide a way to keep the previous default (i.e. How do I get my colors/pixmaps back?) PS: WRT the second point, I find the inactive pixmaps too "live" for my taste (and thus prefer the pixmaps). PS2: Is good to have the input/dialog backgrounds configurable but the defaults should be voted. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Dec. 30, 2012

PATCH: uicmd.cc prefs.save_dir cleanup

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

corvid wrote: > Jeremy wrote: > > > > uicmd.cc exports a get()/set() interface to the default save directory > > that is never used elsewhere, and used only trivially internally. It > > also rereads prefs.save_dir at every save, which is redundant. It > > would be simpler to have an init() interface that is called once. > > There would be no change to the user. > > > > Patch attached. Thoughts? > > Seems like a good change to make... OK, committed. Regards, Jeremy Henty

Dec. 30, 2012

ui colors again

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > Today I dug up the old ui colors patch from last September, ripped out the > part that used system colors as defaults that was a problem*, and played > around with it a little. I really like configurable colors, so, since I > haven't heard anyone say anything like feature freeze yet, I'll make another > push for this thing. Committed. - I changed the inactive icon appearance some more. - By default it's using the fltk default colors. - It might be nice to be able to specify the selection color, too.

Dec. 30, 2012