Re: [Usability]"widget"

[Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de>]

On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Pat Costello wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2002 Mark Nelson wrote: 
> 
> > Why Havoc?  It was already stated that in "Human Computer Interaction"
> > the word defines the elemenets of the WIMP interface.  If it's good
> > enough for them, why is it not good enough for us?  I really do want to
> > know actually.  Is it just that you don't like the word because you
> > think it's silly or unprofessional?  It really seems that this is why
> > most people here don't like it, even if they try to hide that reason
> > behind a thousand different arguements.  What does this really come down
> > to?
> > 
> 
> "Controls" is fine as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary. "Widget" 
> isn't. The AHD is the language reference we are using for GNOME. Everything else 
> is just personal opinion. There is no need for this discussion. 

Autsch - now you've knocked out yourself: From the AHD:

	"Widget: 1. A small mechanical device or control; a gadget. ..."

With that definition widgets are a kind of controls. Well, and since
zillions of lines of code use the term "widget" already everything is
perfect now: World shines bright, birds are singing: We stay with widget.

BASTA - END OF DISCUSSION.


Ciao
Mathias

PS: The one who can read is in advantage... ;-)
-- 
WWW:           http://taschenorakel.de/mathias/
PGP/GnuPG:     1024-Bit DSA: ID 55E572F3, 1024-Bit RSA: ID EAAF7CF1
"e:-1" is the Slashdot Troll Emoticon. Often seen after the word "Scor"