Re: [Proposal] Remove some stuff from Application menu

On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 20:18, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 12:06, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
> > Hi Shaun,
> > 
> > On Wed, 1 Jul 2003, Shaun McCance wrote:
> > 
> > > > >      1. rename "$USER Home" icon on desktop as "Personal Files" (do we
> > > > >         need to expose the home concept to all users?)
> > 
> > > actually a problem at this point?  What I mean is, we've been doing this
> > > i18n stuff for a while now, and I would assume (I don't know) that home
> > > has already been translated.  Are there languages where home presents a
> > > l10n problem that hasn't already been solved?
> > 
> > Well, after much discussion the Dutch translation team decided to
> > translate 'Home' with the equivalent of 'Personal folder'. In Nautilus


> Thanks for the info.  I'll admit I don't know the issues presented by
> different languages.  Concrete examples like this are helpful.

Similar stuff for Italian translation. But 'cause we have the (UN*X)
tech user as our end user (hey, translators have their rules too :->),
and 'cause he should know the home concept, then "Luca's Home" became
simply "Home di Luca" (di = 's).

So we have 2 or 3 troubles:
      * we (Italian users) are using an untranslated term (if someone
        don't know English it's a mess)
      * we are using a tech term (if someone can translate the word
        "home", we don't know if he can understand the concept)
      * it seems a word's play, especially using the house icon

> Note that the 'Home' icon in Yelp is (IMO) just silly.  There's some
> discussion concerning this on bug #91610.
> The house seems like a very poor metaphor in light of l10n issues, but
> I'm at a loss to suggest anything better.

IMHO this is a 'minor' trouble. Same for a floppy for Save action.

> > > I don't think "the home concept" is all that hard.  I mean, it's just
> > > where you put stuff.  Is it really that hard to understand that I put
> > > stuff in my home directory?  As for "Personal Files", I'm not sure that
> > > everything in my home directory qualifies as personal.
> > 
> > They are personal in the sense that other users can't access them (unless
> > you explicitly tell otherwise).
> Well, yes.  That's pretty much what I was saying.  Those of us who use
> Unix and GNU/Linux in a corporate environment do share files with other
> users quite often.  Never do anything that betrays the multi-user nature
> of the system.  (I'm not saying 'Personal Files' necessarily does.  I'm
> just repeating one of my mantras.)

Are there any better adjective in English for "Personal" ? 

Note that I was speaking about 2 desktop icons: "Personal Files" = $HOME
and "Resources" = system:// + starthere://, the first (I've in mind a
folder with an home emblem) one to open your $HOME, the second one for
stuff more related to system in front of you or 'virtual' stuff such as

It wasn't an absolute change, but one related to a couple of icon's

But I've to admit there are some incoherence: i.e. if you place a
file/folder on desktop it's personal, but don't in "Personal Files"

> Is that a bad thing?  Probably not.  Humans are good with synonyms. 
> However, I think a similar situation would arise by using 'Personal
> Files'.  Users will come across the term 'home directory', and they'll
> have to learn that it's the 'Personal Files' folder.  This probably
> isn't too hard on the user, but it rather negates the whole point of
> using 'Personal Files' to begin with.

True. My first UN*X lesson, in the shell era, when fmwm was the best wm,
said: " have a directory called home, a place to store your
personal files..."

So we can call it directly "Personal Files" or explain the $HOME concept
in documentation :-)

Unfortunately now the fist object you see is the desktop: it's personal,
but in it there is the "place to store personal files" :-| Only
use_home_as_desktop can help us :-)

> You mentioned Gnome not being consistent with non-Gnome applications. 
> And I agree in general.  But Gnome should certainly be consistent with
> itself, all the way through.  Is the System Administrator's Guide going
> to talk about users' Personal Files folders?  I think it would be silly
> if it did, but inconsistent if it didn't.

I think we don't need to coventry the HOME concept in GNOME. I think we
have to keep it in nautilus toolbar and everywhere we need to jump to
home, especially 'cause I don't think we can translate the UN*X
filesystem: there will be always an /home directory, so we have to keep
somewhere the home concept and hope people want to learn it.

Just don't expose UN*X filesystem and it's English 'legacy' everywhere. 

GNOME wants to be the UNIX desktop for everyone, isn't it? So don't
expose 30 years of UN*X history on first login.

> I don't see how that's an argument for desktop == $HOME.  I call tech
> support for some Unixy program (written in, let's say, Motif).  The tech
> support guy says home directory.  If I have 'Personal Files', I don't
> know where my home directory is.

First the wet dream of everyone is remove s/Motif/GTK+ (as well as
s/QT/GTK+ and, probably s/tk/GTK+).

Second if support guy says home directory AND you don't know what is an
home directory, probably you'll ask "What is the home directory" and
support guy'll says "It's the place to store your personal files!". I
suppose you pay support, so they HAVE TO explain it.

Third if you are asking something to your support, you don't know it!!
In this example you don't know what is the "home concept". You can learn
it reading docs or contacting support

Fourth : l10n/i18n troubles. "home directory" is a common concept for
all (?) UN*X users. But as Rainout said in Germany they already use
personal files. So support guy should know it, or he have to spend a bit
more time to help you.

>   If I have desktop == $HOME, I don't
> know where my home directory is.  (Sure, it's right in front of me, but
> do I know that?)  But if my desktop says "shaunm's Home", I can probably
> figure out where my home directory is, unless I'm really not too bright.

But you have to know English language, or, better, UN*X internals :->

> > > user out of a huge amount of information.  You can't possibly shield
> > > users from the home directory, so masking its existence will only hurt
> > > them in the long run.
> > 
> > A few years ago you would probably have said that you can't possibly
> > shield UNIX-users from the command line. Now we can. In a few years,
> > possibly sooner, we will be able to shield them from filesystem
> > intracacies as well.
> Let's not get too proud just yet.  As someone who frequently answers
> questions and fixes problems on, I assure you we have
> not shielded users from the command line.
> And I guess I still don't see how this is shielding anybody from
> anything.  As a user, what complexity have you saved me from?  The
> complexity of this directory being called my home?  That doesn't seem
> difficult to me.  In fact, thanks to web browsers, that term is very
> likely to be recognized by a lot of people.

GNOME: desktop for EVERYONE!

> --
> Shaun
Think bigger

			My uncle

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