Re: [Usability] "About" menu items galore...

[Jason Hoover <jasonhoover verizon net>]

On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 17:53 +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:

> If I ever get around to creating an application worth
> inflicting^H^H^H^H^H^H releasing to the public I would use the Authors
> list to indicate only those who have a Copyright stake in the software and
> have a really long list of thanks that would be only slightly shorter than
> your average changelog.  I would expect most users to ignore the Credits
> section of the About dialog though.  I would want to make sure to provide
> the application name, what it does (eg Number Puzzle) and the version
> information and contact information (list address because it is reasonably
> permanent) and website address (preferably Gnome.org so it can be
> centrally maintained and redirected to the most up to date source because
> old binaries with obselete links survive long after web pages have moved).

Yes. Maybe all of the about dialogues wouldn't bother me so much if they
contained something useful, anything, really.

> It is kind cool for contributors to be able to show orindary users "I did
> that" and a well written About Dialog provides genuinely usefuly
> information even if you have nuked your documentation.
> 
> Even if we wanted to remove all the about dialogs from the applets it
> could be politically difficult to do and and I must make it absolutely
> clear I think it is more important to fix the about dialogs to actually
> include helpful information and relevant coherent descriptions that
> actually tell you what the program is about.

Politics always gets in the way. But seriously, do we need to know what
the clock applet is about? Then again, I suppose I can find out who made
a physical clock if I look hard enough too. And I suppose it is kind of
like complaining about the sticker on the back.

> We could set a Gnome standard and try to insist anything included in Gnome
> would have to follow the applet rules but we have never worked that way
> before and I think it would be a really terrible idea to try and start
> that more authoritarian road to managing Gnome.

A requirement wouldn't be necessary, a recommendation perhaps, since not
everything (About Clock) would need a support forum.

> (This is all just wild speculation so please do not respond with your own
> questions and if and buts and conspiracy theories on this.  I'm pretty
> sure this is something that will not happen but it nonetheless interesting
> to talk about if we can keep the discussion sane and civilised.)

Of course. 

> Documentation is owned by someone else.  This could stand to be made
> clearer in some cases and a section on the program copyright could be
> included in the doucmentations as well.  (I wonder how much disk space
> could be saved by having a standard folder containing all the licensese
> instead of repeating them in every About Dialog and in every program
> manual and in some cases ever file of source code.)

That explains that. It'd make a lot of sense, especially considering
quite a few applets don't even show what license they're written under!

I wonder, why is it called the "Titlepage" (not a real word, by the way)
and kept at the top, if all it contains is legal and copyright
information and no actual title?

> Panel menu ordering is about putting the most important items in the prime
> locations.  (On any menu the top and bottom position are usually easiest
> places to target.) The About menu item is not very important and will get
> bumped around in favour of more important items.  When coming up with a
> recommend layout (hint) and filing a bug report (hint, hint) you should
> keep this in mind and be careful developers understand when they can break
> your guidelines on the suggested order for context menuitems in applets.

Taking a closer look at this, there seems to be a sort-of convention,
that only volume control and gnome-panel itself break. It usually
follows the order:

1) No-more-than-one-click-required actions.
2) Actions that open new windows to change settings or get help
2.1) With important things first.
2.2) And help second.
2.3) And About last.
3) Panel stuff
4) Lock

This seems to work pretty well. Should it be made into a standard?

My complaint about the button-appearance of the clock was moot, since it
works like a toggle, however, it remains flat unless hovered over or
activated. The show desktop button should probably be doing the same
thing.

I'd reopen: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=142156

But I lack the permissions.

As for the workspace switcher and menu bar not showing tool tips,
workspace switcher seems to have a bug open already;

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125644

I have reservations against opening enhancement bugs, but then, maybe it
won't be as bad as;

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303683 or
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=308743

Look out volume applet, you're next.

> Calum overlord of all usability will know! (Seems like Calum is running a
> one man show at the moment but perhaps there are other paid professionals
> still working away more quietly on Gnome usability.)

Indeed. Never have I seen so much work done by one person. Okay, not a
whole truth, but the thought is still there.

[Distracting side note]

The "panel menus" page of:

http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/proposals/

is missing.

Soooo tired...stupid evolution copy-bug...mumble mumble...