Re: [HIG] Mini-Guidelines content

Adam Elman wrote:

> >Sub-topic name
> >Description of sub-topic (1 paragaph)
> >Screenshot/diagram
> >Further description of diagram if required (max. 2 paragraphs)
> >Heading "Guidelines"
> >Bulleted list of "required" guidelines
> >Bulleted list of "optional" guidelines
> >More detailed explanation of guidelines, including further tables and
> >diagrams if necessary (max. 1 page)
> This works for me.  Any objections to this basic format?  Calum, do
> we need anything more detailed?  Let's agree on this by, say,
> 00:00GMT Monday 20 August (5PM PDT on Sunday 8/19)?

Well, I don't know if "required" and "optional" necessarily make sense
in GNOME world for now, so we might want to think of some other suitable
terms.... "advised" and "suggested", "strongly recommended" and
"recommended", "must do" and "should do"... I don't know what would work
best.  Other guidelines I've seen give numerical rankings, e.g. on a
scale of 1-3.

As Suzanna said, we need to sort out what sort of things we want to call
out with different types of glyph, and what those glyphs should be-- in
the docuement I referred to, the only thing we did was use a different
bullet point style for the required and optional guidelines, but the Mac
and Java guidelines make more extensive use of such things.  Depends how
far we want to embellish the fairly straight-laced GNOME standard
docuementation format, if at all.

I guess should also agree on standard ways of wording cross-references
etc., but that's not so important until the proof-reading stage, and
hopefully all that stuff is already documented in the GDP styleguide


CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer       Sun Microsystems Ireland
mailto:calum benson ireland sun com    Desktop Engineering Group                      +353 1 819 9771

Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems

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