> My logic is that the obvious options (e.g. top level menus and other easily > accessible controls) should _only_ do the absolutely important things, and > not more. Advanced functionality should only be accessible via other methods > that users will discover as they go along (or when they decide to actually > read a manual). Good software doesn't need a manual ;) But appart from that I agree > Mockup here: http://www.osnews.com/img/3721/nautilus.png > Explanation of the mockup above: > > 1. Get rid of the "Open in New Window". I must say that this option is the > only one of the rest 5 that I took away that I am not sure of and I require > more input. On the other hand, it is bad enough to have three "Open" > functions crammed there. I'd have to disagree with this, the item is only there for folders, and is a crucial feature IMHO. Windows explorer doesn't have it and I find that crippling. > 2. Merge Scripts and Addons under a new name that is easy to understand. > "Services" or "Extensions" are good for me, but most of you are better than > me in the english language, so please pick a name. :D > Yes, Scripts are not the same as addons, but the user doesn't need to know > that, they have similar functionality anyway. Allow both the traditional > nautilus scripts and the addons to run from the same submenu, transparently > (in case you want to keep the Script functionality that is). I agree with David that naming it Extensions is exposing an implementation detail, but I don't like his suggestion of "Actions". We have enought trouble with out ambiguos "Actions" menu on the panel already. I think that something like "Tools" would be a much better title. David also mentions that sub-context menus are a bad idea - but we already have one for scripts, and we have them elsewhere, and they are a hell of a lot better than really long, flat context menus. > 3. Get rid of Rename, and please adopt the Mac and BeOS way of renaming a > file. Click once (or slowly twice) and rename the file. Go no - please god no. Getting rid of rename isn't so bad because you can rename from the properties dialog - but that slow click thing: a. is useless if you use single click mode, which is a supported feature of nautilus b. is the biggest newbie pitfall i've ever encountered. I've seen a lot of people loose documents because of this, and i've seen a lot of people's blood pressure rise because of it. > 4. The stretching icon business have absolutely no place in the top level > menu. Agreed - Jimmac may like it when he's playing with vectors, but in the day to day use of the desktop It really doens't deserve a place in the context menu. Maybe Tools-> Resize icon would be more apt. > And yes, addons can have more than 20 items after a few months if the idea > takes off. And this is why at this time we might need an "Extension Manager" > which will list for you all the addons with a checkbox next to them, and the > user should be able to easily enable/disable (show/hide) addons via it. And > this is another reason why these .server files might need some extra info in > them (that is, if you are going to keep these .server files instead of > another way that helps the easy show/hide functionality). I'm still not mad about the whole addon thing - It can all too often be used to work around problems that should be fixed the "Right Way(TM)". But I do agree with the idea of merging scripts and pluggable context menus into one sub menu. Both because they are soo simialar the user doesn't need to know the difference, and because more and more apps are going to want to use pluggable context menus, and we can only control the ones we ship. I've attached what i think the nautilus context menu should look like, haven't had a chance to look at your mockup Eugenia so I don't know how similar they are. -- Mark Finlay <sisob eircom net>
Attachment:
context (copy).png
Description: PNG image
