Hello,

On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 16:18, Sven Neumann wrote:

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89275 suggests to replace the term "Alpha" in the GIMP user interface by the terms Transparency and/or Translucency. This could need some discussion here, that's why I'd like to point the fellowship of gimp-developer to this report. Please keep the discussion on the list.

I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the "What/How" statement. I can see how the term "alpha" may be unclear to new users, but I think it would be a pity to replace it all together, as this might cause users who are accustomed with the term to be confused.

Changing the sub-menu to read "Transparency" instead of "Alpha" but keeping the "Add Alpha Channel" item will also give new users a way to connect the meaning of "alpha" with "transparency".

Once we've settled on a strategy for this, we might need a volunteer to go through the source and do the changes. Sounds like a good opportunity to browse the GIMP source and contribute, don't you think?

Will this include changing the code or only changing the strings? Changing the code use "transparency" instead of "alpha" will cause changes in the API, or am I wrong here?

Sincerely, ./Brix

brix@gimp.org (2002-12-18 at 1711.13 +0100):

I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the "What/How" statement. I can see how the term "alpha" may be unclear to new users, but I think it would be a pity to replace it all together, as this might cause users who are accustomed with the term to be confused.

Another How: My image is RGB, how do I make it RGBA? :]

Side effect, will be RGBA be named RGBT everywhere (in user visible interface)? Is not a bit silly to start renaming basic concepts of a field with something else (aka causing differences with reference docs that existed long time ago)? Just wondering.

GSR

On 18-Dec-2002, Sven Neumann wrote:

suggests to replace the term "Alpha" in the GIMP user interface by the terms Transparency and/or Translucency. This could need some discussion here, that's why I'd like to point the fellowship of gimp-developer to this report. Please keep the discussion on the list.

Once we've settled on a strategy for this, we might need a volunteer to go through the source and do the changes. Sounds like a good opportunity to browse the GIMP source and contribute, don't you think?

I say leave it alone. Alpha is the correct term here, transparency isnt.

On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 12:08:55PM +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:

Side effect, will be RGBA be named RGBT everywhere (in user visible interface)? Is not a bit silly to start renaming basic concepts of a field with something else (aka causing differences with reference docs that existed long time ago)? Just wondering.

the user shouldn't be confronted with the term RGBA at all. IIRC, this is the case unless she's writing a script or plug-in in which case she is not a user any longer but a developer.

Maybe. But how do you say RGBA in less then five words without using the acronym? I think RGBA is one of the terms a Gimp user could learn.

BTW, I'm not sure if someone already pointed out Transparency is the oposite of Alpha, so if we changed Alpha to Transparency, not only the word, but also the meaning would change (think about all the hscales, entries and curves).

Yeti

On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:04:10 -0600 (CST), "Stephen J Baker" wrote:

On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:

brix@gimp.org (2002-12-18 at 1711.13 +0100):

I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the "What/How" statement. I can see how the term "alpha" may be unclear to new users, but I think it would be a pity to replace it all together, as this might cause users who are accustomed with the term to be confused.

Another How: My image is RGB, how do I make it RGBA? :]

I agree - that it would be better to consistently use the more modern, technical term 'Alpha' - and provide some simple cues to new users that 'Alpha' and 'Transparency' are related.

That's why I think that the suggestion given in the bug report #89275 is the easiest way to solve this problem: keep "alpha" almost everywhere, but just rename the sub-menu "Alpha" to "Transparency". So you would have "->Image->Transparency->Add Alpha Channel".

-Raphaël

0

sven@gimp.org (2002-12-19 at 1208.55 +0100):

the user shouldn't be confronted with the term RGBA at all. IIRC, this is the case unless she's writing a script or plug-in in which case she is not a user any longer but a developer.

Then no confrontation with CMYK either, or with bit depth or DPI or moire or lots of other terms. Sorry, but all these are terms of the trade, dunno why should that be not under user control and view, at least if the app is not a basic paint app but something more advanced (like GIMP was, is and I thought will be, at least in one of the modes / interfaces / whatever). And BTW, Alpha channel is one way to get (1 - Transparency) or Opacity, Layer Masks are another.

If this is not the situation, tell me what is.

GSR

sven@gimp.org (2002-12-20 at 1246.03 +0100):

I agree for CMYK, DPI as well as RGB, but I don't think that RGBA is a commonly used term and it should thus not be used in the user interface and AFAIK it isn't.

You should then check GIMP's Compose operation, you can compose three images as RGB, or four as RGBA. And when you inspect a PNG you can get ones that are RGB and some others that are RGBA (file(1) reports all this correctly), no coder voodoo, but plain user interests. For me and the people I know around, RGBA is a perfectly normal term, at the same level of the others.

GSR