Re: Definition of "desktop" - was a Usability topic.

[Pat Costello <Patrick Costello Sun COM>]

> <quote who="Pat Costello">
> 
> > Jeff states: 
> > 
> > > But the desktop is the "thingy wot has icons on it"...
> > 
> > Interestingly, there has been low-intensity smouldering over the term
> > "desktop" for some time. I'd like to refer you (and everyone else) to the
> > GNOME Foundation statement on the http://www.gnome.org/intro/findout.html
> > page, namely: 
> > 
> > o The GNOME desktop: an easy to use windows-based environment for users. 
> > 
> > This definition does not imply that the desktop is the "thingy behind the
> > icons". This definition in fact implies that the desktop is the sum of all
> > parts, in other words the complete environment.
> 
> Yes, I'm guilty of muddying the waters here too; I pushed pretty hard for
> the release category to be called the 'GNOME Desktop'.
> 
> I think my disagreement is mostly contextual. We have a number of contexts
> for the word 'desktop':
> 
>   - Pure user interface level: 'button', 'window', 'desktop', 'menu',
>     'panel', 'icon'
> 
>   - Release category level: 'Desktop release', 'Developer Platform release',
>     'Fifth Toe release'
> 
>   - Computer level: 'Desktop computer', 'Server', 'Thin client'
> 
> Mixing up the vocabulary in each context is dreadfully bad. This is my chief
> problem with labelling what's currently known as the 'Foot Menu', 'Desktop'.
> That confuses its role in the user interface level -> it is not the desktop.
> 
> The confusion between the user interface level and release level is real,
> however, and a big bummer. If we call everything the 'GNOME Desktop', and
> then proceed to confuse everyone by trying to call only one small chunk of
> the user visible functionality 'desktop', our users lose out.
> 
> I don't think I've come to a productive conclusion, sorry. :-)
> 

Jeff, although you haven't reached a definitive conclusion, you have at least 
clarified for everyone that there is serious inconsistency in the use of the 
term "desktop". I agree with you that the so-called Foot Menu cannot be called 
the Desktop Menu, even if we concur that the term "desktop" has a universal 
connotation. However, in Roberto's suggestion for menu rejigging, the Foot Menu 
had dropped out. Main Menu had taken over from the existing Actions Menu with 
some additions. My suggestion was that the menus in that category are 
global-type menus, actions taken at the top-level, not at application or 
component level. Therefore, a suitable name for that type of menu would be 
Desktop Menu. This would tie in with the core GNOME Foundation definition of 
"desktop". We can eradicate the inconsistent usage of "desktop" at the other 
levels you mentioned by changing the nomenclature where we find inconsistent 
usage. 

Pat