Re: The Help Menu

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

>> The final draft (again, after a fully formed document has been released,
>> looked at, and subsequently revised by the public a gazillion times
before
>> it becomes a FINAL DRAFT) will likely propose a new addition to the
>> standard gamut of "File / Edit / View / Options / Help / Preferences" ..
>
>This is not a standard gamut, nor should it be.  I would argue strongly
>against all of these menus being standard.  We need to require as few
>menus as possible, so when the developers come up with all the other menus
>that their application requires, the application can still fit in 800
>pixels wide.


Gotta disagree.  Applications should only possess non-standard menus if it's
REALLY appropriate, i.e. a music playing application could have a "track"
menu but shouldn't have a "volume" menu--that belongs as an Option.

Help should always be the rightmost menu, and I'm beginning to see that
preferences belongs as a menu inside of Options, as it's a subcategory of
it.

>
>> For example, I see nothing wrong with:
>>
>> +-+---------------------------------------------+-+-+
>> |O| Application                                 |^|X|
>> +=+=============================================+=+=+
>> | 8'  File  Edit  View  Options  Preferences        |
>> +---------------------------------------------------+
>> |  +-                                               |
>> |  |\                                               |
>> |    \                                              |
>> |   Little Gnome Footprint                          |
>
>I see many things wrong with it.  First off, having an Icon for a menu
>heading will have new users not realizing it is a menu.  Second of all, it
>will make it far more difficult to support GNOME users, a text menu you
>can just say "Click on Main", and a user will look around for the word
>"Main" on the screen.  I don't want, when giving phone support, to have to
>say, "OK, now find file...ok, don't click on it, now see the little
>footprint... no not the big foot on the bottom of the screen... yeah, that
>little kidney-shaped thing right next to file, click there."


Guh, you're right most probably.  "Click the footprint next to file" isn't
TERRIBLE though, but I really want to see what research shows on this one.
Gnome should be reconfigurable to and from the gnomeprint, though.

>> A simple little Gnome Footprint present in the menu bar of each apps
>> window would do the trick nicely, at first thought. I'm open to
>> suggestions. Even yours, Tom. ;) hee
>
>If all of these menus are standard, what is left to put in your Footprint
>menu?


Footprint gets the "What gnome can do to this window" stuff.