| 2006-12-19 17:20:24 |
Brett Alton |
description |
Binary package hint: desktop-base
Desktop icons need to conform to a proper 48px x 48px (or whatever the preferred dimension is) grid. The shortcuts seem to easily overlap each other, and the text is squished together when they are placed side-by-side. In reference to Web Development or Media Printing, the icons need more padding.
At the moment, icons can not be place directly side-by-side without text overlapping (such as "brett's Home" and "Computer", the "er" in "Computer" and the "br" in "brett's Home" overlap and make the name unreadable.
Also, placing icons vertically, they don't seem to have the freedom to move 2px up or down, but rather only a already defined 5 or 6px, making it hard to line the icons up.
If the icon sizes were all standardized (ie: 36px x 36px), and there was an invisible grid for the icons to snap too, this problem would be erased. |
Binary package hint: desktop-base
Desktop icons need to conform to a proper 48px x 48px (or whatever the preferred dimension is) grid. The shortcuts seem to easily overlap each other, and the text is squished together when they are placed side-by-side. In reference to Web Development or Media Printing, the icons need more padding.
At the moment, icons can not be place directly side-by-side without text overlapping (such as "michael's Home" and "Computer", the "er" in "Computer" and the "mi" in "michael's Home" overlap and make the name unreadable. In the screenshot I attached, I have "brett's Home" and you can easily imagine what one more character would do to the spacing between "Computer" and the home icon.
Also, placing icons vertically, they don't seem to have the freedom to move 2px up or down, but rather only a already defined 5 or 6px, making it hard to line the icons up.
If the icon sizes were all standardized (ie: 36px x 36px), and there was an invisible grid for the icons to snap too, this problem would be erased. |
|
