OpenXTalk Forums

-
What goes where for testing?

Don't move or tinker with anything.
Just open the stack

(not in OXT RCx as your mac has that set as the default application, judging by the icon)
I have only tested it in the Lite version of OXT, not tested in Paul's RCx version.

Also, where was the "dictionary-test.zip" from as mine was "dictionary-test.7z"

(not in OXT RCx as your mac has that set as the default application, judging by the icon)

Dunno how that happened as I gave up on 'heavy' after a very long time with no upgrades.

MacOS 12.7.5

Functionality is fine as far as I can see.

BUT I do think the stack/card background needs a colour so there is some contrast between it and the fields:
-

yuck, minty!

Just the first, illustrative colour, I laid my greasy paws on: after I had tried grey and found that that conflicted with something else:
- -
Mind you, your reaction may say more about what's wrong with the way your dentist goes about things than my lack of aesthetics.

It kind of looks very early Microsoft Windows now,

richmond62 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 12:12 pm Mind you, your reaction may say more about what's wrong with the way your dentist goes about things than my lack of aesthetics.

This is exactly why setting a background colour on a stack is very subjective. What one person might be happy with is not what everyone else might be happy with, so I left it unset so it inherits from the IDE. (haha, not going into that one yet again).

That is exactly why I would either:

1. Use a 'neutral' grey, or

2. Do this:
-

Can't say I'm a fan of that either - as that looks like something out of Windows 95 'Motif' or a 'Next' computer UI.
I'll leave it as it is I think, so it at least feels part-and-parcel with the rest of the IDE.

Over here there is such a thin line between the fields and the card that the fields are difficult to make out:
-

richmond62 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 12:51 pm Over here there is such a thin line between the fields and the card that the fields are difficult to make out.

This thin border around things is a design decision by Apple. If you compare how it looks on earlier versions of the OS:
The background colour of a generic stack didn't always used to be a harsh white, granted. However the fields were drawn differently as they inherited their style from the underlying OS. So you are kind of wanting the appearance of an earlier version of MacOS, or to mimic it at least.

I could also ask, why the need for the edges of the field to be visible at all?
I mean, the only bit you can really interact with is the text and the draggable area of the scroller - so having no border at all is probably something Apple are working towards.

On your screenshot, a few messages up, the fields of the inspector are even thinner, - again, this is what the rest of the IDE is doing because that's what your system is doing.

so having no border at all is probably something Apple are working towards

That could be a problem with Donald Trump if he becomes president again.

Frankly, Apple, and its dictatorial "how things should look" attitude can go and take a running jump.

If no borders are visible sentences/words can just 'bleed' into the card and end-users may not realise that there is more.

richmond62 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 1:28 pm Frankly, Apple, and its dictatorial "how things should look" attitude can go and take a running jump.

I'm not saying that it's great - don't get me wrong, but it's what all the apps on your computer will be doing.

"It is inevitable".

So, you can either try and fight the appearance on an app-by-app basis or there are only a few other options:

1. learn to live with it
2. go back to an earlier OS, like catalina (pictured)
3. switch to a different OS where the system theme is your choice ()

1. learn to live with it
2. go back to an earlier OS, like catalina (pictured)
3. switch to a different OS where the system theme is your choice

However, you carefully side-stepped:

4. Muck around with LC, OXT, whatever, so it looks the way you want it, not the way Tim Cook, Craig 'with the hairstyle', Satya Nedela, or anyone else wants it to look like.
-

I didn't really sidestep it - yes, you can theme a stack to however you want.
However - that post above is the exact argument as to why you'd not want to.

Also, consider the biggest user base is likely going to be windows users.
You can't use a justification of setting a background colour or setting a large border, or drop shadows on fields - just based on what it might look like on your mac.
This stack will be part of the IDE, so has to work for all users - and that includes windows users:
So setting something that goes against the grain, and against the rest of the OS is a bit of a strange decision.
It perhaps would be understandable if it was just to look a certain way for Mac users, but hard-coding a stack to a set appearance to go against the rest of the system is what I'd avoid (and is what I've always been on about avoiding).

There is a 5th option of course, where I start to use conditional theming based on the user's version of MacOS they might be running to appease those who don't like the decisions Apple are making, but again - why deviate from what the OS is doing to appease an even smaller potential subset of users who find it objectionable?

But your last screen shot DOES employ grey as the stack/card colour so there is contrast, and that is what I have been banging on about.

richmond62 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 2:58 pm But your last screen shot DOES employ grey as the stack/card colour so there is contrast, and that is what I have been banging on about.

Yes, because that's the system theme on windows.
Which is exactly my point. It adjusts because it uses the native appearance of the IDE. It might run totally inverse to how you might feel, but the majority of Mac users expect an app to follow the same appearance scheme as the rest of the system. (If you opened Textedit to find that they used a red bar behind the window title, you'd think.... "why is this different to the rest of the OS - what's the reasoning behind it". Or just perhaps - "that looks dodgy".

For Linux users, you'd expect any app to follow the system appearance scheme which is applied in settings.

The same for Windows users. If they open an app to find it looks different to the rest of the OS, they'd be wondering why the custom scheme.

This is my argument against going off-on-a-tangent and doing your own thing re theming (applying custom backgrounds and such) when it does not match the rest of the OS. Fine if it matches and gels with everything else as that would be the expected behaviour - no matter if that's perceived as 'right' or 'wrong' in anyone else's opinion.

going off-on-a-tangent and doing your own thing

Understood.

But could we not have, in the preferences a setting where end-users could, should they so want, set the card background colour of IDE stacks to something of their choice, over-riding whatever their operating system forces on the IDE?

richmond62 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2024 4:39 pm But could we not have, in the preferences a setting where end-users could, should they so want, set the card background colour of IDE stacks to something of their choice, over-riding whatever their operating system forces on the IDE?

You already have a few options, and I'll go over them again here:

1. In the preferences, there's this option. Turn this on (on as default) to prevent the IDE from altering your stack colours.
What this means: so if you choose a dark or light theme, and we have a stack called "Richmond's red stack", the stack will remain red if this is on (The IDE won't attempt to set the colours back to default to match the rest of the IDE). It won't touch it. 2. You also have this option. This is intended for stacks outside the IDE's folder. It allows your stack to skip any theming, so you can style the background / foreground / text to whatever colours you want and the IDE won't touch it. This is per stack-by-stack basis if you wanted the rest of the IDE themed, but NOT your red stack in this case. Which is followed by this confirmation alert: Now, just checking I have this right - you'd like an option where you can choose to set the entire IDE's stacks to colours of your choice?
(essentially customising the look of the entire IDE to colours you specify?) - like what Godot does with it's theme that doesn't match the rest of the OS? I'm okay with that, but it should not be the default. It should be up to the user if they want a custom theme - so they are aware that it's very non standard. Just because it really doesn't match anything else on the OS.
(and that's fine, as long as the user has specifically looked for and set this as an override).