[thedeadman]

Hi,

I'd like to propose to Team Kodi and the WIP skinning community the idea of an 'experimental' skins repository that would sit alongside the current official and 'WIP' skin repo's.

This repo would be for skins that are complete and tested, but that would not pass the requirements for an official skin for one reason or another (e.g. lack of support for feature 'x' , deliberate non-inclusion of a particular window / dialog etc to maintain a design scheme). Such skins would of course still need to adhere to official repo requirements for assets like fonts and background imagery, but would otherwise be free (within reason) to take their designs wherever they wanted.

Such a repo would obviously be of benefit to folk like me (Pellucid is unlikely to make the requirements for an official skin, but I still think it's worthy work), but I also feel there are other skinners who might want to push at the boundaries of Kodi a little and would benefit from having greater 'official' exposure to their work.

Anyway, just a suggestion. Thoughts?

[Martijn]

we did that once and there was almost no interest at all. some skins never updated again or only every couple of months.
so we dropped it.

besides official repo skins don't need to support ALL features.

[thedeadman]

Thanks Martijn,

I don't recall ever seeing an 'experimental' skins repo - do you mean the WIP skins repo?

You're right of course that skins don't need to support all features (PVR for example), there are however significant limits on what skinners can and can't do. For example, I force video playback to end on return to content listings and have deliberately removed a range of dialogs / controls that I feel are redundant (others may disagree of course).

So I guess now i'm stuck. I would like to see my skin be used, but know that without it being made available through the stock Kodi addon system (i.e. without requiring people to install my repo), the best i'll get are browsers of the WIP skin forum. With so few new skins around, I do think this is a shame.

But then, I made my bed so I guess I must now lie in it!

[Martijn]

let's ask @ronie his opinion. Perhaps he's ok with not all dialogs are included because they are not used in your skin.
You never know if it'll be rejected if you haven't asked

[thedeadman]

'Tis true. I'll submit it soon and see how it goes.

[ronie]

when you create a skin for kodi, it should represent all functionality (within limits) kodi has to offer.
if you provide a skin that "cripples" the user experience, then that may reflect bad on kodi.

for instance forcefully killing video playback, you may like it and (and probably have good reasons for it),
but the user may see this as a bug and will come to the conclusion that kodi is a piece of buggy/crappy software.


if there are any useless dialogs in kodi, and skinners can reach consensus on this, i'm all for removing those dialogs in kodi.
same applies to built-in controls that skinners find not useful.

all i'm trying to prevent is that one piece (of what we've defined as) 'standard' functionality works in one skin,
but is broken or missing in another skin. confluence is our default 'basic' skin. whatever works in confluence,
should at least function in other skins as well. you're of course free to built upon / extend whatever is supported in confluence
to whatever level you see fit.

[toolpunk]

@ronie
I understand your reasons, but I disagree.

Kodi offers a lot. Like a whole lot. And while this is great for the few power users out there, it's frightening and alienating the more significant share of average users. I've felt this way for a long time and apparently I'm not alone with this opinion. Don't get me wrong, it is great that Kodi has all those features, but I don't think they should be mandatory and forced on everyone.

Introducing the settings level button was one of the best user experience decisions for the project, because it retains advanced functionality but hides it from those who don't need or want to deal with it. Unfortunately the concept doesn't expand too well into other areas of the application, so that we are stuck with an all-or-nothing approach where the skin designer needs to make decisions on behalf of the user.

I get that the core team can't be bothered dealing with unwarranted bug reports due to a third party's design decisions, but not allowing simpler, more minimal skins on the official repo is another step in the wrong direction in my opinion. After all the official repo is the first place an inexperienced user will turn to if he finds the default skin too confusing and complicated.

I think even skins not supporting all of Kodi's features or deviating from standard behavior should be on there, but with a clear note of what is missing or may behave unexpectedly.

Ideally we could come up with some sort of "feature levels", e.g.
FL1: Only the absolutely necessary dialogs and buttons
FL2: Full support for all of Kodi's basic functionality
FL3: Advanced features that go beyond what Kodi offers by default
Of course it's going to be complicated deciding on what belongs in which tier, but this might allow to offer skin options for all kinds of users on the official repository.

[thedeadman]

Yep, what @toolpunk said (though I do appreciate your position and reasoning Ronie).

If I can make another point: A consequence of pegging everything on Confluence is that its design is not challenged. I don't think i'm alone in suggesting that it could do with a rethink, particularly in light of the increasing potential use cases Kodi can / needs to support.

I suspect that it has now become impossible to create a one-size-fits-all user experience, so perhaps an experimental section would help the community try out some new ideas.

[jurialmunkey]

+1

I think having an "experimental" skins section pretty much avoids the problems that ronie is discussing as users will be aware that experimental skins are missing certain features or function in ways different to the default. It would definitely open things up for some interesting designs.

@thedeadman -- I'm interested to know what dialogs/controls you don't use?

[Ned Scott]

As long as skinners are up front about what is or isn't supported, then I think toolpunk has a great idea. Confluence doesn't show off all Kodi has to offer (to the point where I would call something "standard", like custom home items), and yet we still include Confluence :)

Plus, we would need such exceptions for special projects like a "car interface" or a skin designed specifically for the visually impaired (which does not always mean totally blind). Imagine if someone made a skin for turning Kodi into an info kiosk instead of using any movie library. That would be freaking awesome.

[thedeadman]

@jurialmunkey:

Here are a few bits and bobs that I don't use:

[Removed] DialogPVRGuideOSD.xml - I just use DialogPVRGuideInfo.xml instead

[Removed] DialogSongInfo.xml - There are not enough infolabels available to make including this worthwhile IMHO. I handle song star ratings through the ‘now playing’ visualiser instead. Perhaps if lyrics could be made available to DialogSongInfo it would be more useful?

[Removed] VideoOverlay.xml - seems to be redundant.

[Redirect] MusicOSD.xml - I redirect to a custom window for this.

[Redirect] MusicVisualisation.xml - redirect as MusicOSD to custom window

[Removed] PlayerControls.xml - I have never once used this in all my years of using XBMC / Kodi.

[Removed] MyPVRSearch.xml: This window seems incredibly overcomplicated. Can now be handled by global search, so will use that instead.

[Removed] “filter” (dialogMediaFilter.xml). Smart playlists and / or global search manage this well enough in my opinion.

[da-anda]

I somewhat agree that skins don't have to support everything and give them more freedom to use custom and unique navigatioinal concepts. And depending on the navigational concept certain core features/dialogs might make sense or might not. I think we have to drift away from the thinking/requirement that a skin is just Confluence with a different color scheme and adjusted graphics. Skins should be able to entirely change the userexperience, and stuff that works in skin A doesn't have to work in skin B. That said, we ofc have to make sure that this is communicated to the users and that they see prior installation which features are supported (supports mouse, touch, PVR, ...). That should not mean that skins should be allowed to drop support for basics, like setting up the system (including the often forgotten peripherals dialoge) etc.

I wrote some ideas on how the skinning engine could be changed to give skins even more freedom in what they do and every skinner and dev is welcome to join the discussion. These ideas also go in the direction that every skin will/can provide a unique experience and is not bound to anything. http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=232144