Use case for per-protocol icons

[Sean Egan]

On 8/6/07, Josh Williams <yurimxpxman at gmail.com> wrote:
> That does not account for the completely protocol-dependent
> functionality, such as /nudge, /buzz, etc.

It does. It is desirable to have, and we are currently developing a
consistent, API and user interface for this "get alert" (nudge, buzz,
etc) feature. You seem to be stuck in a box defined by your habits
that you can't get out of and see that there are better ways to handle
these things than showing protocol icons.

> Personally, I do not even group people's accounts into one contact.
> It's a PITA because I make heavy usage of each protocol's features.

Such a what? We tend not to support features that have very little
wide-spread support.

> I suppose that's just a core principle that we disagree about. I'm in
> favor of emphasising people, but not at the expense of reduced
> functionality (in this case, addressing the UI as technology).

There is no reduced functionality.

> One half of one second *plus the use of your mouse*. I don't know
> about you, but I avoid using the mouse (don't say I'm the only one -
> even RMS has told me he does the same), *especially* for trivial
> things that should be shown to me anyways. (eg., I prefer gmail over
> AOL mail partially because I don't want to click "Inbox" before I see
> my mail; it should 'just be there'.)

Perhaps we should make tooltips work if you're using keyboard
navigation. Perhaps if you navigate to a blist node via your keyboard
keys, that causes its tooltip to show off to the side.

> I am still not even convinced that there really *are* any benefits of
> the green circle. The only argument for it I can see is that you think
> it looks nicer, but that's merely a matter of opinion.

It's a simple, consistent, uncomplicated indicator of status. The
previous system used an inconsistent, complex, jumble of various
emblems and icons: a complex bitmap of confusion, if you will.

> No you wouldn't. You've already stated that you don't _care_ about my
> problems. You prefer simplicity over functionality. If that's the way
> you like it, God bless you, too. I simply differ in fundamental design
> concepts, so I have no intention of contributing to the pidgin UI.

*Nobody* has *ever* said they don't care about your problems. We're
just encouraging you to look outside of the box you've fallen into
through habit. We eagerly want to hear your actual problems and
determine how to best fix them. We've already fixed a whole bunch of
problems that have reveled themselves by removing protocol icons, and
we'd love to do more.

I look forward to seeing your Qt UI.

-s.