Re: [HIG] Mini-Guidelines content

[Gregory Merchan <merchan phys lsu edu>]

On 01 Aug 2001 17:51:44 +0100, colin z robertson wrote:
> I'm wondering what sort of areas we're looking to cover in the GNOME
> 2.0 Mini-Guidelines document. Here's a suggested list of things to
> include, all of it up for discussion.
> 

The list is at least a good target. Maybe if we reach it we can see what
more to add then.

> - Menus
>   - Principles
>   - Standard Menus

Colin should have CVS access soon. Meanwhile shall we upload his current
work to the site?  (I'm behind in email and reading, but on a cursory
glance it seems sane.)

> - Dialogs
>   - Principles
>   - Standard Dialogs

We have the #interface proposal online. Was this ever merged with
Colin's? We should perhaps see to a stylesheet if one doesn't exist
already.

> - Layout and Aesthetics

James Cape had done much of this in the UI Hit Squad era. I think I've
spotted some contradictions in the toolkit or its use since then, so
there are probably a few updates that should be done. Many of these
items can be made readily available to programmers through the
gnome-uidefs.h file in the library (if that still exists).

> - Terminology

I propose that for the UI we adopt the GDP glossary. We still need an
internal one for the parts of the system that users do not see. I'll be
uploading my work on that soon.

> - Default Keybindings

This should also be locked into the gnome-uidefs.h file. The GAP has
some work done widget level binding and Colin's menu work and the dialog
proposal have some more. We need to get this worked into some sort of
matrix to spot conflicts and potential conflicts.

> 
> Is there anything else that needs to be included? Conversely, is there
> anything on this list that we should actually avoid for this document?
> 

I think this is good. We need to bring together the parts we have and
eliminate any conflicts there may be. Since there is a good amount of
work done for this already, I don't think we need to avoid any of it.

> Also we need to know what sort of timescale we're looking at. Does
> anyone have an up-to-date schedule for GNOME 2.0 development, and can
> anyone translate that into a deadline for our work? The only schedule
> that I know of is
> http://lists.gnome.org/archives/gnome-2-0-list/2001-May/msg00019.html
> 

I really wish I knew.

> colin
> 
>   _____________________________                            ____
>   rtnl  http://rational.cjb.net     c z robertson ndirect co uk
>                                                    icq 13294163

Greg Merchan
(auspex)