On 14 June 2012 20:29, Paul Sladen <ubu...@paul.sladen.org> wrote: > It could be possible to reduce the pixel count aswell. What counts as > 'small' for you?
> What you do feel the solution would be? To specify the minimum number > of menus categories that menu fit on the left, and then scale the font > and icon size in the top menu until a threshold is matched? Personally, I don't believe a lot of people will suffer from the 'small screen' problem since the typical budget computer bought today from the likes of Dell and Acer will have a respectably large resolution. Thus, I feel scaling would be a suitable option since most displays aren't likely to require much in the first place, thus reducing the risk of too much shrinkage. I'm not sure about how effective it would be to specify the number of menus that appear, since that makes it too easy for a user to install enough applications to exceed that limit, leading to undefined behaviour. If we were going to handle such overflow, I can't think of an elegant way of doing so (having the excess appear as entries in a manu of their own would just be ugly). In short, I think the scaling alone should be sufficient for 99.9% of users needs. Chris
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
