Post by chriscrawford on Nov 6, 2015 13:48:02 GMT -8
The original design of the eeyal icon system used words that were all circles, connected by triangles of size 18h by 12v, if I recall correctly. These triangles attached to each of the two words that they connected.
The new system Luc has designed uses smaller triangles, 10h by 10v, with an open space between the triangles and the icons. This raises two questions. Here is a comparison of the two styles:
First, are the smaller triangles better than the big ones? We're right at the bottom edge of visibility here and I fear that these tiny triangles might not be clear enough to the user.
But there's a second, much worse issue: the shield shapes used to denote actors won't work well with the triangles coming out of or into their bottom side. All the other shapes work well with triangles from any side, but the actor-shapes might not be so accommodating. As yet, I have no sentence structures that use actor-icons in such a way, so we might not have a problem here. But this could come back to bite us in the butt further down the road.
It's even worse with the pentagon shape used for props. That is simply impossible to use, as neither side is accessible to the triangles.
Post by chriscrawford on Nov 8, 2015 10:35:57 GMT -8
Yes, I agree that, if we increase the size of the triangles a bit, it looks better. I think they should be sized so that there is just one pixel of white space between the triangle and the icon. And you're right that the use of the arrow on the bottom of the actor icon is not a problem. However, I think it will be a much more serious problem with the pentagon.