Re: [Usability] Gnome Wallpaper Properties
- From: Rodney Dawes <dobey free fr>
- To: John F Dixon Iv <John Dixon ndsu nodak edu>
- Cc: usability gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Usability] Gnome Wallpaper Properties
- Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:39:59 -0500
On Die , 2003-12-14 at 15:10, John F Dixon Iv wrote:
> It seems to me that the label "Available Wallpaper" isn't necessary.
> More to the point, it is somewhat misleading. The definition in the
> style guide makes it seem like a desktop background consists of only one
> image. In fact, it consists of an image over a background color. So, it
> seems to me that it would be wise to dump the label entirely, or at the
> least, change it to be something like "Images". I also think that the
> term "Available" is superfluous.
"Images" wouldn't be correct though. "No Wallpaper" contains no images,
for example. And it wouldn't remove any superfluousness from the dialog
in that sense. A list full of thumbnails makes it pretty obvious what it
is. It is nominally decorative and for accessibility. Dumping it
entirely makes it difficult to make the dialog accessible. Looking
throughout my desktop, a great number of the labels are superfluous, at
least in terms of how I understand a computer. Not everyone sees things
in the same way, and sometimes we must be superfluous to allow others to
use things in a similar way. I don't think "it is superfluous" is a
sufficient argument for changing or removing labels in any application.
> Second, the label for the background color and gradient selector should
> be changed. Right now the label doesn't really reflect what it actually
It reflects exactly what it does. What would you rather have it be?
I could change it to "Desktop Background Colors" but then if I were
to straight up follow the GDSG and use "Desktop Background" instead
of "Wallpaper", it would describe what it is doing, even less. Unless
an image has an alpha channel, it's not going to describe an action
that is directly related to the image.
> I hope that this isn't taken to be too harsh, it is still a huge
> improvement over the old one.
This mail seems to be mostly about the "Desktop Background" vs.
"Wallpaper" issue, that, in previous mail, I said I would present a
compilation of evidence as to why "Wallpaper" is the better term for
what we, and specifically, this capplet, are trying to do on the
desktop. I will still do that, when I get a little spot of time to do
it, however, I don't believe this mail is the place to do it. Calum's
mail was much more direct and pointed out the issues better, so I will
reply to it, when I get time. Until the issues with that are resolved,
no further changes to labels will be made.
] [Thread Prev