RE: PROPOSAL: UISG Menu Line Standardization

[Josh Steiner <Josh BerkeleyNet com>]

Time for me to step up and stop lurking in the shadows...

Personally I find having both 'Options' -and- 'Preferences' to be
confusing.  As some people have mentioned I think that perhaps
'Defaults' makes most sense to me.  Since this would apply the whole
program, it seems logical to tuck it into the Program menu.

About the 'Edit' debate, imagine if I had a very small application, the
size of your average mp3/cd-player, that needs to have menu items, but
has _absolutely no use_ for editing functions.  In this case requiring
that the coders include useless fluff could be quite detrimental to the
smoothness and clarity of the UI.  I don't think users will really be
that confused to find that there is no edit menu when the applications
context would not lead someone want that functionality.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bowie Poag [SMTP:bjp@primenet.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, August 06, 1998 6:15 PM
> To:	Karl Hagelin
> Subject:	RE: PROPOSAL: UISG Menu Line Standardization
> 
> 
> 
> > Bowie wrote:
> > >Perhaps Preferences should be taken off the top-leve, renamed
> "Defaults",
> > >and thrown in as a submenu under Options...?
> > 
> > If we are going to change the name, I think Configure (or
> configuration) is the 
> > best when it comes to app wide settings. Configure is something you
> do once 
> > or twice, and it always looks good to use a verb as a command.
> > 
> > If we are going to have a Program menu for app wide commands, it
> definetly belongs 
> > there.
> 
> I believe we already went over this.. "Config" is a little too
> nondescript
> a term to use. I guess the toss up, right now at least, is between
> Preferences and Defaults.
> 
> Bowie
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-gui-list-request@gnome.org with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.