5 ms·
Very impressive. One inconsistency stands out given the careful attention to detail. In this image, they make a point of emphasizing that background pixels shou
by bostonpete 16y ago
Very impressive. One inconsistency stands out given the careful attention to detail. In this image, they make a point of emphasizing that background pixels should be split to form a cleaner edge:
http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox-star-8010/xerox-star-8010-15.jpg http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox-star-8...
...but this image shows that most of the top of a folder icon (not including the tab) did not split the background pixel:
http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox-star-8010/xerox-star-8010-12.jpg http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox-star-8...
- reedlaw 16y agoWhat do they mean by splitting background pixels? Something like dithering?
- biot 16y agoThe background contains vertical bars 2 pixels high. The edge of the icon should therefore be positioned so that only 1 pixel of the vertical bars is showing rather than having both pixels showing. Also the left and right edges should have the whitespace between the vertical bars showing rather than the vertical bars directly adjacent to the left and right edges. Also, I'm only seeing the inconsistency in the concave parts of the icons. The outer border is fully consistent with the design guidelines.