Re: [HIG] Mini-Guidelines content

On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 02:50:16AM -0500, Gregory Merchan wrote:
> 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.)

In that case you'll want the docbook sources, which aren't very pretty
at the moment. I'll tidy them up within the next few days and either
put them on my website or upload them to CVS, depending on whether I
have access.

> > - Dialogs
> >   - Principles
> >   - Standard Dialogs
> We have the #interface proposal online. Was this ever merged with
> Colin's?

The #interface proposal is compatible with mine except for one detail:
they recommend that the default button should be non-destructive and I
don't. Also I have a lot of rules that they don't cover.

> We should perhaps see to a stylesheet if one doesn't exist
> already.


Anyway, there's still work to be done on these parts. I've written
about dialog principles and about standard menus, but I don't have
standard dialogs or menu principles. I'm working on the latter, but
I'll need someone more knowledgable about GNOME and GTK APIs to help
me with standard dialogs.

> > - Layout and Aesthetics

Perhaps I should be a bit more explicit about what I'm thinking of

We need a section covering things like:
- How to indicate that a group of radio buttons are related.
- Why widgets should be laid out neatly.
- When to use tabbed pages
- How to use labels.
- Colours and fonts.
- etc.

> 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).

I arrived here after the UI Hitsquad era had ended. What sort of stuff
has been done?

> > - Terminology
> I propose that for the UI we adopt the GDP glossary.

Agreed. I was initially a bit concerned that it was rather optimised
for documentation, but that shouldn't be too much of a problem,
assuming developers also write documentation.

Some parts of it are very odd. I haven't heard anyone other than
myself or my father speak of the "Return" key since I stopped using
the old BBC, yet here it is, resurrected. Has it been lingering on
UNIX workstations?

> 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.

I'm not sure we'd want that in the HIG. After all, it shouldn't matter
to the users what terms the developers use. On the other hand, you
could take the approach of merging the user and developer lists and
marking developer terms as such. And I have the feeling that all this
should be merged with the translation efforts...

> > - 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.



  _____________________________                            ____
  rtnl     c z robertson ndirect co uk
                                                   icq 13294163

Attachment: pgpNuuKMpmeao.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]