Re: Gnome desktop files doesn't follow the freedesktop standards

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 21:10, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 19:25, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> 
> > Here's the problem: the UI guidelines (and I agree they are correct) say
> > the menus should contain "Mozilla Web Browser" or "Totem Media Player"
> 
> Well, we're not totally consistent here; why is it just "System Monitor"
> then?  Simply because the upstream application is called "GNOME System
> Monitor"?

Some set of executables are deemed "part of the OS" I think, rather than
apps with a distinguishable name. You probably don't care too much about
one system monitor vs. another.

> What if originally Rhythmbox had been called "GNOME Music"?  Would it
> then just be "Music" in the menu, simply because of the happenstance of
> its upstream name?

Thus "Rhythmbox Media Player" is probably right.

> I think it makes the most sense to *only* use GenericName by default,
> and upon collisions (e.g. two Web Browsers), then do something like
> this:
> 
> GenericName (Name)

I think the parens thing is gross, personally. "Web Browser (Mozilla)"
reads badly and feels less friendly compared to "Mozilla Web Browser"

> So the HIG's recommendation here doesn't make much sense to me (and it
> doesn't seem to really be a particularly strong one).

"Mozilla Web Browser" sounds the nicest. We should find a way to
implement that, not do "Web Browser (Mozilla)" just because the spec
makes that easy to implement.

> Note that under your suggestion Epiphany would have to be "Epiphany Web
> Browser", and not just "Web Browser".

Yes, that's the correct menu item for Epiphany.

The HIG has always recommended "Name GenericName" like that, the main
place simply "GenericName" appeared was in Red Hat Linux 8.0, because I
didn't read the HIG and screwed it up.

Havoc