Re: [Usability] Re: Settings windows and dialogs

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Gregory Merchan <merchan baton phys lsu edu> writes: 
> If not conforming is not a bug then there is no point to having a HIG at all.
> If there is no HIG then the people awaiting one so that they can code to
> platform UI specification will take their programmers elsewhere.
> 

If you want (or don't want) my opinion, ;-), you need to be looking at
two tasks for the UI team:

 a) push the toolkit, window manager, etc. in the right long-term 
    direction by writing down the Ultimate Master Plan for a given 
    area, and filing appropriate bugzilla reports

 b) document what application authors should do in the present, using
    available APIs, ideally even documenting which specific APIs to
    use and how. The APIs must be things in the platform libraries
    today. The recommendation cannot suggest cut-and-pasting big hunks
    of error-prone stuff all over creation.

If the UI team can't understand the difference in these two things, it
is useless. So far you guys are doing a great job, and this specific
suggestion is also practical, just not in a 2.0 timeframe. i.e. 
I'm saying you're mixing your a) into your b).

My opinion is that the HIG should contain b), while a) should be
tracked via lists, bugzilla, and short HTML or text documents written
up and linked to from bugzilla or list posts.

In any case, on this concrete issue my request is for a 2.0
recommendation that is reasonable to do with our current API, without
creating a maintenance disaster (not an option) or breaking the freeze
with a huge untested API (not an option either). Ideally the 2.0
recommendation would go in the HIG.

If we can't get such a recommendation then we will have to make it up
ourselves. I would personally make up the Done button for the code I
write.

If you do a) when app authors need b) then you will rightfully be
ignored, and if the HIG contains a) then it will rightfully be
ignored as well. My .02.

Havoc