On 13/07/10 21:27, Frederik Nnaji wrote: > you are suggesting the introduction of a "generic throbber" over an > indicator menu.. > did i understand that correctly? > I think it will be difficult to have a generic throbber that is also super-classy. I think we could have a generic throbber which any AppIndicator can use (perhaps, a spinny behind the actual icon) but also create the ability for indicators to have classy, custom throbbers like the network one for wifi connections. > 3. A green flash for success > >> > perhaps keep a notification open until the indicator system knows that > the user is acknowledging/has acknowledged the situation.. > in particular, such failure indicates some sort of network failing in > the background, which deserves being promoted into the user's > awareness.. > No, notifications are asyncronous, we can't coordinate them that way it would interfere with the queuing of other notifications. >> When we wish to signal a warning, we use orange or red depending on the >> criticality. We may use it in a persistent fashion or as a temporary >> indicator. >> > this should be "persistent until acknowledged"-class of notification: > "one of your tasks has just started up/is now failing/requires your > attention"" > Some persistent, some don't. > i strongly do not recommend hierarchically organized concepts of > failure categorically coloured in my focal point... > I agree that we don't want every indicator pedantically to have an orange and red state. We DO, however, want people to think about the nature of what they need to communicate, and use colour appropriately. SOME indicators would have both, some would just have one or the other, some would have none. Mark
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature