Re: ANNOUNCE: Style Guide available for review.

[Ryan Cresawn <cresawn bmh com>]

Peter Norton writes:
 > One reason is consistancy.  True, the name "file" may not actually
 > perfectly, logically suit everything that is in that menu.  However if you
 > mandate that certian menus are there, and they're *alwyas* there, then
 > you have made your first step to user acceptance.  I have seen mac users
 > *revile* programs because the programmer didn't obey the apple guidelines.
 > 
 > In other words, Even if it doesn't seem to make much sense to the
 > programmer, it provides a basic level of familiarity to a user.  As for
 > references - The Macintosh Style Guide.  I'm just going to say that what
 > works for the Mac will work for anyone, and the proof is how may rabid
 > followers and imitators swear by interface guidelines that apple set out.
 > 
 > >   "Applications should not allow users to change the default
 > >    bindings for common operations."
 > > 
 > > I'm not convinced that isn't a typo.  I definately have no intention
 > > of following it.  The style guide needs to explain *why*. 
 > 
 > Isn't it because there's going to be a centralized set of useful
 > keybindings which will be manipulated by one program, so they can set
 > these for themselves globally, for everything they use, but each
 > application shouldn't do it for itself? 

Consistency across applications is critical.  It makes a lot of sense
to have global key settings.  I suspect that when this funtionality is 
included in gnome applications that users will commit to using only
those applications that conform.

Well thought-out keyboard shortcuts are very friendly and the Mac
proves it.  The design of the Mac interface has allowed it to remain
largely unchanged, and still one of the best, since 1984.  Have you
noticed that Mac users typically remain Mac users and don't want to
change.  How many people do you know curse Windows because things are
inconsistent?

The next time you use Win95 click on the "Start" button and notice
when the menu appears.  It appears when the mouse button is down.  Now 
click with the right mouse button on the background and notice when
the menu appears.  It appears when the mouse button is released.  This 
kind of inconsistency is annoying.

Here is another thought about global configuration in gnome.  I have
noticed that some gnome applications have tear-away menus, whereas
others do not.  How about making a global configuration that would
either set all application menus to be torn away or make all menus
appear on the top of each window.

The idea here is that the interface would be consistent among all
apps.  A user could get NeXT-like menus or Windows-like menus
depending on their personal taste.  I think it would also make sense
to not allow menus to be torn away if they are set to "stationary".
This should be a global setting affecting all gnome apps, not
individual apps.

-- 
Ryan