Re: [Usability] Re: program binary names

On 13Oct2001 03:07PM (-0700), Seth Nickell wrote:
> In terms of the "Functional description" stuff, George will be making
> this a field in .desktop files, so the most important thing is to have a
> functional description planned, changing names right now would be
> premature. We'd also like a list of potential functional descriptions,
> so people don't end up generating different descriptions for similar
> applications (for example "Email Client" and "Email" and "Mail").
> Eventually the desktop integration page will contain a list of
> functional descriptions that should be used if your application fits the
> bill. Functional descriptions are a *lot* more specific than menu
> categories, so "Terminal" would here be appropriate. We want to make
> sure all areas of applications are represented (if no description fits
> your application you are free to create one, but we'd like the standard
> to cover as much right off the bat as possible)

I had a discussion with Seth about the functional description thing,
and I think appending them at the end is preferrable to the
parentheses thing.

For example, I think seeing:

Evolution Mail
Netscape Mail

in the menu is more useful to users than seeing:

Mail (Evolution)
Mail (Netscape)

It's important for users to be able to see what programs do from the
menu entry, but I think once users have started using a particular
program, then the program name, not the description of what it does,
is the high order bit. If I'm an Evolution user, Netscape Mail, or
Gnus or Mutt or Balsa is not a functional equivalent - none of these
will show the same set of mail (unless I'm using IMAP) and they have
quite different UIs which can take time to learn. Also, adding the
functional spec at the end will make things more consistent with
programs where a functional spec would be redundant. For example, I
think some of the following items currently in my panel menu should
not have additional functional descriptions:

GNOME Terminal
System Monitor
GNOME Icon Editor

Here's how I'd caption some of the things in the proposal, so you can
get a feel for how this style of naming reads and fits together.

Nautilus File Manager 
GIMP Image Editor
Gnome Mines (I don't think adding the word Minesweeper improves
             things, but if it does, I'd call it GNOME Minesweeper;
             I think that may have issues though.)
Evolution Mail
Evolution Calendar
Aisle Riot    (Maybe Ailse Riot Solitaire but I'm not sure that is needed)
Time Tracking Tool 
Same Gnome or Gnome Same Game (it's called Same Gnome partly to
                               distinguish it from the KDE original)
VideoLAN Movie Player

I discussed this with Seth and he thought it sounded OK.

As for the tooltips, the user action verb phrase nomenclature can be a
bit awkward for games and for more complex applications. What would
you say for Gnumeric or AbiWord or Evolution?

On an unrelated note, the section on MIME type integration should
probably mention that you should not install .keys or .mime files that
are already in the master gnome-vfs database, only for custom types
not yet in the database. In particular, gnome-vfs has an entry for
html already and an application should not install it's own.



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