Re: RSG, draft three

[Tom Vogt <tom lemuria org>]

Bowie Poag <bjp@primenet.com> wrote:
> > official Gnome User Interface Styleguide that is being maintained by 
> > Bowie Poag and others.
> 
> One more time, Tom..
> 
> Maintained by Dan Kaminsky, Bowie J. Poag, Bill Swingle. 

see, that's the reason I wrote "and others" - bill was a recent addition,
right? I don't even remember any announcements on the list.

anyway, changed.


> > C1 - Mandatory (bare minimum)
> >      Contains only the essential styles, so current programs can be brought
> >      up to at least some level of compliance fast.
> >      C1 features are considered to be of primary importance and non-compliance
> >      will be considered a bug for Gnome applications.
> 
> Very, very bad idea. This is where experience comes in, Tom -- Not
> personal opinion. Youre punishing the programmers by telling them what
> theyve done so far is "buggy".. This is anything BUT incentive to improve.

a) this was generally agreed upon and yours is the first argument against I
hear.
b) don't consider the wording final. this is mostly a try to put the meaning
into reasonable amounts of space.
c) it's only a bug for a GNOME app. and you've gotta  pull a  line somewhere
or everyone and his mom will run around calling themselves "gnome app".



> > C3 - Suggested (should be there)
> >      More advanced, harder-to-implement features, beyond the
> >      call of duty, yet still within the core group of styles.
> >      Should, but don't have to be implemented in finished programs, in no 
> >      way mandatory for development versions.
> 
> Like what? What separates C2 from C4? You cant define one by relying upon
> the definitions of others. There needs to be concrete, specific detail
> here.

provide them. :)

reread b) above. this document is meant to outline the CONCEPTS and to
incite discussions.  it's not the bible. not even the satanic bible for the
non-xians among us. :)



> > Exceptions will of course be allowed if the application or other circumstances
> > require.
> 
> No exceptions. Your compliance levels should be flexible enough to
> encompass everything from Barney The Dinosaur's Fun Math 1-2-3 to software
> that controls nuclear reactors. It is the fault of the guide, not the
> fault of the coder.

the very good example of  kai's power tools was mentioned. just because
someone found a better way to do his specific things doesn't mean he's
wrong, does it?


> > 2.4  SYSTEM UTILITIES
> > ---------------------
> 
> Define "system utilities". This definition varies from platform to
> platform.

gnome system utilities, of course. gtop, find-thingy, all those little
beasts. maybe "system utilities" isn't a good word, but until someone
provides me with a better one, I'll leave it alone.




> > 3.1  GENERAL LAYOUT
> > -------------------
> > C2 - Dialog and other buttons in windows other than the main window should
> > tend to be found at the bottom. for example, a dialog with only a single
> > button to close the window should have that button at the very bottom.
> 
> Left justified? Right justified? Centered? Where is it?

good point. any takers? I'll happily write  down anything that seems to find
general agreement.



> > C5 - [Pie Menus]
> 
> Untested thoeries do not belong within the main structure of any style
> guide.
that's why it's got a c5 rating, you know?


> Hold gun, aim gun at foot, pull trigger.
you just got a SIGSEGV signal. are you gnome-compliant and able to handle it
correctly?:)))

(lets hope bowie is not a windoze app or we'll have to reinstall him)


-- 
The universe does not have laws -- it has habits, and habits can be broken.