3 ms·
I partially agree, but it's also about versatility. Icons should be recognisable is a multitude of sizes and themes. The problem is that simpler icons have a st
by toper-centage 6y ago
I partially agree, but it's also about versatility. Icons should be recognisable is a multitude of sizes and themes. The problem is that simpler icons have a steeper learning curve. Less tech savy people can't possible understand what many, or even most icons are supposed to mean. The app im typing this right now has a sort of paper plane icon on top. When did paper planes become "send"? My parents would certainly miss that metaphor.
- dheera 6y ago> When did paper planes become "send"? I guess it was the standard instant messaging system in grade school?
- pantelisk 6y agoShould be a messily crumbled paper ball. Maybe we can use this for heavy hitting spam instead, ha!
- thaumasiotes 6y agoI say "send" should be 寄. ;D It's the same learning burden as any other icon for most people, but with the advantage that it actually means "send". (Though not in an online messaging context; that's 发.)
- dheera 6y ago> It's the same learning burden as any other icon for most people I disagree. Good icons are things that almost everyone in the world has seen before.
- thaumasiotes 6y agoThere aren't enough of those. We're already well past the point where icons are completely inscrutable, even in applications intended solely for a monolingual user base.
- dheera 6y agoSo at least having half of them scrutable is surely better than forcing the entire world to learn Chinese.
- thaumasiotes 6y agoThis approach does not involve forcing the entire world to learn Chinese. It involves a bunch of written vocabulary words. It exactly mirrors the old approach of using English words, except that it fits into the narrower space given to icons. And it is vastly superior to using icons, for the same reason that using English words is.