OT: Theming custom widgets [was Re: xfdesktop patch (new mcs options for icon labels)]

[Brian J. Tarricone]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/2006 3:09 PM, Andrew Conkling wrote:
> On 5/25/06, Brian J. Tarricone <bjt23 at cornell.edu> wrote:
>> Having said that, I just absolutely love how I go out of my way to
>> implement a feature people had asked for (that I wasn't originally too
>> interested in implementing), only for some people to feel the need to
>> complain about it when it's done.  Jesus, people, give it a rest.  It's
>> a HIDDEN OPTION for those of you with the ability and need to tinker.
>> For all intents and purposes to the average user, the option does not
>> (and, IMO, need not) exist.  Does that put things in perspective?
> 
> Yes, I would agree there.  But not to beat a dead horse (my own, as it
> turns out), I think this lends credence to making it just work
> according to one's GTK+ theme.

Well, it does.  If you don't want to change it, it Just Works out of the
box.  The thing here is that if you want to change it, it's a
*customisation*.  I picked what I think is a reasonably sane default
value for the opacity (about 60%).  I think it looks pleasing, and is a
neat and "modern" effect that doesn't reduce readability or performance.

The text and text background logically uses the default for the current
gtk theme.  Again, if you want to change it, it's a *custom* change.
While someone might say my 60% opacity value is a somewhat arbitrary
default, the color defaults are built-in defaults, inherent to the
theming of the entire toolkit.  It doesn't require any special syntax in
the gtkrc file; it just pulls the default 'text' and 'base' colors for
the appropriate widget state.

> I think you'll find that there will be
> some people that will always want the opacity setting, but I think
> you've done it exactly right.

Well, thanks for saying so ^_^.  I've been using Mac OS X on and off
lately since I traded my bulky Compaq laptop for a 12" PowerBook, and
while I know I've passively bashed OS X in the past, it's really
starting to grow on me.  There are some things that I wish were
configurable but aren't[1], but overall I think Apple did a
more-than-decent job of picking a sane default look, with just enough
customisation possible to make most of the nitpicky people happy.

So I tend to think you don't need to make every little detail
configurable, and even if you do, adding a pref for everything
imaginable isn't necessarily the right way to go.  Now, sure, I'm not
going to be so arrogant as to assume that my ability to judge that is
the equal of Apple's UI design teams.  But I gotta make some kind of
decision.  And in this case, I took the middle road: it's a hidden pref.

Maybe we should do something decidedly MS-ish and have a TweakUI
settings panel that has all the hidden settings for all the apps (i.e.,
combined with Olivier's WM Tweaks panel).  I dunno, just a random idea.
 Doesn't even need to be an MCS plugin.

Anyway, I'm getting a bit rambly; maybe this should be moved over to
xfce4-dev if we decide to continue the thread.

> (I haven't used SVN with these changes;
> does it pick up the colors by default without tinkering?)

Yeah.  Xfdesktop has a hardcoded 60% opacity for the label background,
which it uses unless overridden by the them.  Then the text and
background colors are driven by the standard theme colors.

>> /me goes off to find someone to make him a Guinness float.
> 
> Well, now that's just gross.  Let's hope it numbs your tongue and
> throat before you even have to swallow it.

Gross?!  It's like an ice cream soda, but with beer instead of ice
cream!  Dude!

	-brian

[1] As an aside, I find it interesting that I just don't feel the need
or desire to mess with OS X too much.  I'll just fire up the web browser
or mail app or whatever, and use stuff.  Whereas on Linux/Xfce I always
feel the need to tinker with the look and how things work.  Maybe that's
what "user interface polish" means.  Or maybe for me it's just an "if I
can play with it, I will" type thing, analogous to "if you build it, he
will come".  I dunno.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFEdjlc6XyW6VEeAnsRAhYbAJ9GgQnjYpfnGLLuvY7TRMR9biM6egCbBVRq
RxQMiYg5UUojUGqOKrHyA4U=
=RJTY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----