GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 112192
"Back" button too small
Last modified: 2004-12-22 21:47:04 UTC
This might not be an Epiphany bug, I'm not sure... The back button is definately too small. All other toolbar buttons are pretty well spaced (they seem to match the largest button which is "Bookmarks"). That is a problem because the Back button is the most important one, so if anything it should be larger than the rest. :)
This is because the back/forward buttons aren't homogenous. marco?
I see... I changed the line "egg_tool_item_set_homogeneous (EGG_TOOL_ITEM (arrowtb), FALSE);" to TRUE (in ephy-arrow-toolbutton.c) and now it feels a lot better. I guess this was set to FALSE so that the Forward button including the arrow wouldn't make all buttons huge? It's no problem for me now because the bookmarks button does this already anyway. :) The perfect solution would certainly be a toolbar which is not homogeneous but has a sane minimum width for buttons. Is something like this in the works for egg (the bonobo toolbar has a similar issue)? Or does anyone know how OS X handles the case of toolbar buttons with large text?
Marco what exactly was your reasoning for making these button not homogenous? i think in the text, text+icons, homogenous is clearly better in this case and in the icons only case it really isn't detrimental.
Well it totally sucks with icons only ;) Ihmo we should just set everything to not expandable. It's all how all gnome toolbars behaves anyway (bonoboui).
Yes but that's horrible because then all buttons have different sizes and some only provide tiny click targets (the worst of all is the "Up" icon in Nautilus). There _really_ needs to be some kind of minimum width (as in KDE for example). My suggestion for a sane minimum width would be the height of the icon, so it would work instantly well with both icons+text and icons only. Then you get at least a square button as click target and it would extend only for icons with larger captions.
Such suggestions should go in a gtk bug I guess (or HIG). There is not much we can do about it.
Alright, this probably should be marked as a duplicate of this one: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107781 If bugs can be duplicates of bugs in other products that is. (I try and hope I don't break anything :)) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 107781 ***