On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 17:11 +0000, Alan Horkan wrote: > > > Save As A New File And Continue In The Old File > > > is more appropriate, which is why I think it's confusing. > > > > Since the concept of saving seems to be one that becomes confusing > > here, perhaps it should be left out? > > I really do not think this should be changed and should be left as "Save a > Copy". The HIG mentiones "Save a Copy" and there is concensus on how it > is supposed to work. The Gedit version of "Save a Copy" works how we > expect it to work. > > Chaning the label to something else increases inconsisantency and > potential confusion for no significant benefit but bad for the Gnome > Desktop as a whole. I don't see how changing the label (gnome wide) would be inconsistent. I can tell you that I never understood what the point of "save a copy" was until this thread. I even thought I found a bug in the gimp revolving around (my lack of understanding) this concept: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156761 "Save" means something to everyone who has used a computer: commit my changes "permanently", don't close the document. "Save a copy" is a variation on that which I thought I knew, but the extra words *add confusion* because now I don't know what aspects of "save" are being performed. "Copy to" tells me exactly what is going to happen, and I find clearer because it isn't corrupted with my preconceived notions of what "save" does. Further, I believe your argument that "the HIG says it" is moot, because the HIG is an organic document. I think what is being suggested is that the label "Save a Copy" is confusing, and perhaps we should consider another label and update the HIG appropriately. -- Karim Nassar Department of Computer Science Box 15600, College of Engineering and Natural Sciences Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011 Office: (928) 523-5868 -=- Mobile: (928) 699-9221
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part