Re: RGSG

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

>damn, making edit a required menu item would render GIMP non-compliant!


Agreed, I've already accepted the "no room" exception.

>to the first point: sure they are, but explain that to a USER. we're
dealing
>USER interface here, not system interface, right?
>as far as a user is concerned, "file" is already bad enough. can't you hear
>the secretaries scream "what the hell is a file? I want to write a
letter!"?


1)  IBM research--they'll open File up first.
2)  Screenplays make this quite clear(but they make anything clear :-)
3)  What happens in a file?  Input/Output.  ANY other heading allows non I/O
stuff to happen here, and that's not exactly a good thing.

>to the second point: with that argument, you could put shutdown into every
>app, because doing a shutdown will also close that program.


Ever notice how many small little apps there are for windows to make
shutdown real quick?  ;-)

>
>> Semantics and I get along *real* well :-)
>I only own a german etymological dictionary, otherwise we could really
play.
>:)))


Ahhahaha

>
>> >but there are also app-wide settings of two kinds. a) not related to any
>> >document (e.g. pics or text or both in toolbar) and b) default-document
>> >settings.
>>
>> Toolbars are tools that modify the open file.
><sigh>
>but the setting whether you want pics or text in your toolbar is NOT
related
>to any file, it's only a property of the program itself.
>simple proof: close all files, see, toolbar is still there.


And if there are no files open the toolbar can't do anything except open a
file or create a new one according to File menu defaults.  ;-)

However, I agree.  Toolbar settings should reside in preferences, not in
File--there's not really the I/O relevance.

>
>> Default documents?  Don't you
>> mean default settings for new files?
>yes, I mean that. the hyphen was misplaced, sorry.


:-D

>
>> There's no arguing that switching for File annoys users.  Where there's
>> argument is if File accurately relates to its contents...I think, at
least,
>> that it's not SOOOO divergent that we need to change it to save users the
>> confusion.
>weird, I talked with several people today (you remember?) and the general
>consent was that the ONLY (can I stress that? O-N-L-Y, there) argument for
>leaving things like "Exit" in file is that it's what people are used to.


Ask a user what they'd do if they were done dealing with all their word
files.  They'll say "File, exit".  Consistent with the input/output
interface.

>the argument gets much stronger for preferences (app-wide, not
>file-specific). these are usually scattered all over the place currently,
>some programs have them in "edit", some in "options", some even in "view".
>where do they belong? in a program menu, sure as hell.


Settings belong in an *edit* menu, no?  What do you do...you edit
settings...


>--
>The universe does not have laws -- it has habits, and habits can be broken.
>
>
>--
>         To unsubscribe: mail gnome-gui-list-request@gnome.org with
>                       "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>
>