This thread exists to collect suggestions and questions for Blizzard UI Developers from the non-Blizzard UI Developers.

Please post questions and suggestions below and I'll collate them and the answers from Slouken or Zootfizzle.

Posting on this thread allows the Blizzard Developer's to only have to look at one thread and hopefully will allow them to respond to more of our suggestions and questions.

General UI Suggestions

• Text Cooldowns for ActionBar.
• Inspection of party members regardless of range.
• Allow Warlocks to choose maximum number of Soul Shards they can have
• Make Unitframe animations for vehicle enter/exit aware of their position (even if it's not at the default spot) or allow them to be disabled.
• Configure text size for quest/ahievement interface.
• CVAR to disable xp gains text
• Dressup Frame preview for mounts/minipets.
• Nameplate range configuration.
• Improve UnitRace and UnitCreatureType to provide more info about NPCs than just humanoid e.g. Globin vs Humanoid.
• slash command to talk to your group be it party or raid, e.g. /gr
• Method of changing icons for specific items, see post #70.
• Allow spells to be cast by id ala /cast spell:44151
• Make the addon selection screen be a tree view nested around dependencies ala AddonControlPanel so modular addons don't clutter up the selection UI. Alternatively, see suggestion in post #111.
• Allow items to be bought out of the guild bank with purchase price going to the guild bank.
• Add the account selection to the login screen.
• Allow switching accounts without logging out.
• Stop sending users real name in the login process across the network in plain text.
• Color code logon/logoff messages by guild/friend list only.
• Better tab selection for the G15 LCD, see post #86
• Make daily quests more obvious in quest log by color coding them blue.
• Allow toggling of aggro sound effects, see post #107
• Allow addons to have saved variables that are shared between accounts on a given install.

Thanks Shefki!

Erranthor, with respect to the GUID instead of unit token requirement, is there a reason why you can't use the UnitGUID function to resolve the GUID if it's what you care about?

---

Q u o t e:
Another one I've wanted for a while: Increase the maximum font size for fontstrings

---

We want this too and it will be in the works, although I cannot give you any time frame on it.

---

Q u o t e:
It would be nice to have some API that interacted better with Gem slotting ( Item wise, not the socket menu).

Some functions that come to mind:

GetNumGemSlots("unit", inventoryid) - Returns the amount of gems slots in a unit's item.

GetGemInfo("unit", inventoryid, socketid) - Returns information on the the gem placed in the specific socket.

---

Arrch, can the GetInventoryItemGems function added in 3.1 help you with what you need? Or are you specifically interested in the information about gems from units other than the player?

---

Q u o t e:
EDIT: Let me expand on this a bit...

If I ask to inspect "target" and the target changes between then and the event firing to tell me I can read the talent tree, the talent tree will be for the unit I asked to inspect, not the unit that is now the target. If I don't know the current GUID is not the GUID I asked for, then I assign the wrong talent spec to the wrong player.

---

I guess the part I'm missing is, if what you're concerned about is actual unit resolution, you can find out the GUID of the "target" you're about to ask for information on before you even submit the request. Don't worry about who the target is when you get the information. Worry about who the target was when you asked.

Edit: Unless we're actually talking about the "target" unit token here, and then I'm still confused

Erranthor, thank you for the more detailed information, it helps a great deal. I'm not certain what the resolution will be yet, but we'll look into the problem.

Hey folks, I want to reiterate that while we really appreciate everyone consolidating their suggestions and placing them in this thread, and it does help us a lot, the previous caveats still apply. Even if some of these are amazing ideas, we might not be able to implement them right away, and the ones that we can implement you might not see for a patch or two.

Thanks again for all the great feedback so far.