Re: To answer your question about the upcoming Style-Guide...

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Vogt <tom@lemuria.org>
To: gnome-gui-list@gnome.org <gnome-gui-list@gnome.org>
Date: Saturday, July 25, 1998 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: To answer your question about the upcoming Style-Guide...


>Dan Kaminsky <effugas@best.com> wrote:
>> >> Why is it the worst ever?  Because of the mucked up Programs menu
default
>> >> categorizer?
>> >it's my personal opinion. I don't usually put imho's anywhere because
what
>> >else should I express, so this one is really a subjective view.
>> We're in the business of objectifying the subjective, at least when it
comes
>> to UIs.  You can't just call something "the worst" without justifying it
in
>> psychological terms.
>in my humble opinion, windoze is "the worst". you don't have to share that
>opinion nor is it a matter at hand here, so let's not get sidetracked by a
>simple comment, ok? :)


Fine.  Don't use your distaste of the windows GUI as a reason to distance
GNOME from Windows if you can't explain what portions of the Windows GUI
should be avoided.

>
>> As a note--notice how KDE and Gnome(w/ appropriate WM) are the interfaces
>> considered to have a chance with mothers  Note that it ISN'T afterstep.
>it's not? I've successfully put afterstep on several desktops of people
with
>ZERO unix (and in one case, zero computer) knowledge.
>also, "gnome with appropriate wm" can very well mean "gnome with
afterstep".
>:)
>
>
>> The only way to fix this is to make screenplays pervasive, and to make
the
>> interface as self-documenting as possible.

>
>my "show that it's possible" could qualify as the later. the former is too
>far away to be of concern to me right now. maybe once the first demo
>implementation is there we can talk about using it as an introduction to
>gnome, but currently it's just an idea.


It's still a relevant one, and for this reason:  We're trying to decide how
to implement our interface to be understandable.  If we can all agree that
screenplays are critical enough, then we can tailor our interface to be
easily trainable by quick tutorial.

>not trying to put screenplays down. I'm just trying to say that my
proposals
>are possible NOW and I'm very willing to talk about screenplays TOMORROW.
>that's the fundamental difference.


I see.