Em 29-01-2012 10:58, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:
On 29/01/2012 20:55, Conscious User wrote:
Em 29-01-2012 10:10, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:
On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:
Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and
Em 29-01-2012 10:10, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:
On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:
Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
to c
Hi,
GTK applications, in particular GNOME core applications,
are moving towards "supermenus".
https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointThree/Features/ApplicationMenu
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/gnomes-revamped-web-browser-is-minimal-mighty/
There is even a APIs to recognize those and render
appr
Em 02-12-2011 01:45, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:
On 02/12/2011 03:45, Dylan McCall wrote:
That this is the case should raise a red flag for everyone who has
paid attention to NotifyOSD. A big part of the design is that an
application can't control where notifications are. It can't treat a
notificat
Which reminds me, shouldn't we stop pretending that synchronous and
asynchronous notifications are similar enough to deserve being
close? They are not, and the current approach causes more problems
than solves.
What problems does it cause?
The most obvious one is the ugly gap when no synchro
Le terça 30 agosto 2011 à 14:24 +0100, Matthew Paul Thomas a écrit :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote on 27/08/11 04:35:
> >
> > It's fantastically cool how the lenses background color changes with
> > the desktop wallpaper. But when the wallpaper is
Without explaining what is your idea for maximized windows, the
usefulness of the mockup is very limited.
Most people would agree that making the menubar moving left and
right is not an acceptable solution, so explaining what would
you do in the maximized case is essential.
Le mercredi 20 avril
> Sorry, but every pixel counts is not a definition of a problem. Before
> coming up with a solution, first you have to define what the problem
> you are trying to solve is. This is the supposed problem as defined by
> Christian Giordano, the man behind this scroll bar implementation:
>
> "Today
Mitja Pagon a écrit:
> You are making all sorts of false assumptions about how people
> use computers. If you ever observed "regular" users you would know,
> that most don't use keyboard shortcuts, some don't even know they
> exist. Furthermore, I've personally once came across someone who
> didn
> The idea that all non-immediate "notifications" should be grouped
> together in a single place, regardless of topic, is very much like the
> idea that progress for all long-running tasks should be grouped
> together in a single place regardless of task. It's the kind of
> categorization that may
Le jeudi 31 mars 2011 à 12:35 -0700, Dylan McCall a écrit :
> This is something that _is_ covered by a particular subset of the
> notification specification; it's just that it isn't guaranteed. Gnome
> Shell is doing what you want here: they went ahead and defined
> persistent notifications, which
Hi,
In Natty, the Ubuntu One item was moved from the Me Menu from
the Messaging Menu. Was this agreed on by the design team?
If it was, I think this is a good opportunity to wonder if
there is still a point in trying to tie the Messaging Menu
to messaging applications only.
Currently, the messa
Le samedi 26 mars 2011 à 19:11 +, Luke Benstead a écrit :
> On 23 March 2011 14:13, Bilal Akhtar wrote:
> > The current way of switching between windows of the same app is
> > time-consuming. The launcher icon has to be clicked twice for the
> > 'spread' compiz view to get activated, and then
It is interactive: when you click on it, the track information is
copied to the clipboard and you can paste it somewhere else.
Whether this is useful, specially considering discoverability, is
a different discussion. In my personal opinion... well, no.
Le samedi 26 mars 2011 à 15:32 -0400, Bret
The original Unity had top and bottom folding, and used an
"intelli-folding" that essentially solved all the current
problems: the last clicked icon was always kept in the same
place, and top or bottom folding would be used depending on
the situation. Think CoverFlow.
I quite liked it, to be hon
> I'm glad I'm not alone, then. Vish raised a good point on IRC.
> Currently the backlight is set to always on, but if they change
> that to "no backlight" or "toggle backlight" the pulse might be
> more noticeable.
I toggle the backlight completely off (with the arrows I don't
see the point, and
Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> ...
(I pretty much agree with the paragraphs before, so I'm simply omitting
them...)
> I think the Gnome Shell designers are badly underestimating the use
> cases for minimize.
Maybe... but the problem is, so is Unity, at least currently. It
didn't remove minimizat
> No Problem:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_(visual_arts)
> Basically, in visual composition, when there are multiple objects
> involved, it becomes pleasing to have one item surrounded by an even
> number of objects (Thus an odd number). Five, IMO, brings clutter,
> particularly to
> I don't feel their argument for getting rid of the Minimize button
> applies to Unity. It works great for Gnome, but we still have
> somewhere to minimize windows to in Unity, thus the Minimize button
> has a point.
Several problems here:
1) The "somewhere to minimize to" was only *one* of the
Ian Santopietro wrote:
> What about flashing the menu with the title for the first, say,
> five seconds that the window is open. That gives an indication as to
> where the menu is, reduces visual clutter, and allows the user to get
> a quick preview of what menu headers are available (File, Edit,
> Is it a coincidence that the two of them worked in Open source projects
> _before_ joining Canonical design team..? ;-)
>
> This topic has been hashed, re-hashed over-n-over again several times..
> I, for one, definitely see a huge improvement in communication from the
> design team. Several m
Remco wrote:
> The thing I find jarring is that we have this mysterious design
> team that basically discusses things behind our backs here at
> Ayatana. I understand that a small team with face-to-face
> meetings can be beneficial to design, but a problem lies in
> communication and collaboratio
Thorsten Wilms wrote:
> The alternative would be to show both title and menu, but giving
> the menu priority. For habituation and quick aiming, it's important
> that the menu always starts in the same spot from the left (assuming
> LTR reading direction). To guarantee that, without using an offse
> I have a simple proposal to fix these problems: The application
> title should be removed from Unity's menu bar. I'm reliably
> informed that this would be extremely low risk, in that it
> would involve changing two lines of code.
But how would be the design for maximized windows? I'm guessing
Looking good!
I think the corner button could flip the launcher AND activate
the Dash. It makes sense:
- clicking on an application launcher closes the Dash if it's
open anyway, so there's little use in making the "application
side" available when the Dash is open
- the tendency is to Dash
> I use Thunderbird, which doesn't get hidden either. Evolution should be killed
> with fire, in my opinion. The entire framework is convoluted as hell, and when
> facing an unstable network, it hangs completely. Messaging Menu aside, I think
> the whole issue of hanging due to an unstable networ
In an effort to get *some* reaction other than Jeremy's to this
thread, let me ask something to the people of this list: how
many of you actually use Evolution? And how many of you feel
confortable with the current way it's integrated to the
Messaging Menu (and now Unity)?
More specifically, how
> Actually, and I already mentioned this to Phong, but that isn't a
> mockup,, rather what my panel looks like after tweaking my Ambiance
> theme. The Panel does follow the user preferences.
My bad. Where I said "current visual of the panel" I actually meant
"current visual of the launcher". The
> Additionally, with the window title and controls visible in the panel
> for maximized windows, I don't feel it's confusing for a user to
> understand that the panel *is* the title bar in that case. A panel
> that looks like the title bar is not required for this distinction to
> be apparent; th
Mark Curtis wrote:
> Someone else suggested putting it in the Me Menu
> This would solve both problems of not being close
> to Shut Down nor cluttering up the Launcher
Ian Santopietro wrote:
> I agree with putting it in the Me Menu. We can't
> put everything only one click away, since with all
>
Hi all,
Let me start the discussion by saying I agree with Matthew:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/packageselection-desktop-n-coherent-behavior-for-apps-in-messagingmenu
http://design.canonical.com/2011/03/quit/
"The engineering solution here is for messaging clients to
split out
Hello,
I've been bugging Neil Patel about this on Twitter lately
and would like to know what the rest of the team has to say.
It seems that Unity has purposefully dropped the ability to
fold icons on top and now only folds the bottom ones. Even
after some weeks, I still think it's very awkward t
It is true that Chrome does not currently cover the use case Matthew
presented, even with the buttons on the right, but I think his point
was that it *could* if the devs *wanted to*, while with buttons on
the right, it is not possible without awkwardness.
That said, I do question if two having di
Le lundi 07 février 2011 à 14:47 -0500, Brett Cornwall a écrit :
>
(...)
Before the Ubuntu devs implemented the current behavior for
Rhythmbox, I have *never* seen any application whose close
button behavior depended on the circumstances. It's common
to see close button inconsistency between d
Hi Jason, thanks for all the information.
I think a wiki page is more efficient than a bug report
for tracking those issues, so I started a crude draft in:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Unity/WindowMatching
I already added pango-view as Paul pointed out. Please,
if anyone sees mistakes (there are pro
> @Conscious User & frederik.nn...@gmail.com - I think we have the same
> taste.
No, we don't. I explicitly said I was not interested in brainstorming
about this. I just wanted a clarification because a lot of people who
I was showing Unity to were asking me about touch-friendl
Hello,
I was thinking about filing a bug (perhaps multiple, per-app
bugs) to track all applications in the Ubuntu repositories
(or at least all applications in a default install) whose
windows are not being currently correctly matched to a
.desktop file in the Unity launcher, causing ugly icons a
> They are very different things, and a design that works well for one
> will hardly ever work well for the other.
I'm a little bit confused now because Mark's blog post about Unity
clearly stated that some design decisions were motivated by touch
devices. Is the Unity design still taking touch
ssage-
From: frederik.nnaji
To: Conscious User
Cc: ayatana
Sent: Tue, Jan 18, 2011 8:39 am
Subject: Re: [Ayatana] I don't think global menu and the panel is good for a
touch OS
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:26, Conscious User wrote:
> It is futile to attempt to solve a problem that does no
> It is futile to attempt to solve a problem that does not yet exist.
What are you talking about? Ubuntu is being installed in touch
devices as we speak:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/11/augen-improves-gentouch-78-teases-lenovo-u1-hybrid-competitor/
http://www.gizchina.com/2010/12/28/u
> Hey Vish and other,
> As told in https://lists.launchpad.net/ayatana/msg04544.html, we
> discussed that behavior at last UDS and it seems that emails shouldn't
> be seen as a service. mpt will be able to develop it a little bit more
> right now.
One issue I'm now noticing at that blueprint disc
> I'm particularly interested in this issue. I like the show on
> hover,
> but how is it going to be addressed in touch devices?
>
> eye-tracking?
I'm not talking about the future. I'm asking how the designers are
handling this issue *now*, for Natty.
___
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 23:39 -0500, Mark Curtis a écrit :
> I figured the point raised in this topic would be that the global menu
> items currently are only visible on HOVER. Something that is
> impossible to do on a touch based device.
I'm particularly interested in this issue. I like the
> However, with Gwibber nothing happens.
That's not true. The current version in the Maverick repositories add an entry
to the message menu specific to the message, like Emnpathy does. And the
current version in trunk uses entries with counts like Evolution, for the
"Messages", "Replies" and "Pri
Hi,
I'm curious with respect to the appmenu compatibility goals
targeted for Natty. So far there are some important apps
non-compatible with it:
XUL apps
[Open,Libre]Office
Swing apps
SWT apps
MonoDevelop
I know that XUL is being worked on, but I heard no news
about the rest. I'm particularly i
> Minimize should be deprecated, because it was a workaround for "hide"
> window", which would have been a non-reversible gesture without tools
> like docky or the unity launcher now, or the window list back then.
> Minimize is a synonym for "iconify", now list to me the situations in
> which you
Hi,
Currently the Unity launcher in Natty does not offer any way
to restore minimized windows if another window from the same
application is opened (the scale plugin is invoked instead,
considering only non-minimized windows).
I suppose this is because it's just an alpha, but what is
the intended
>
> How about getting rid of the section headings and showing instant
> messaging items on top, inboxes with their service-icon as prefix
> below!?
That *does* help cleaning up, but then we need another way of
opening the IM program when no new messages have arrived.
ng Menu to start Gwibber. Furthermore,
> > to actually use the inactive status buttons in the MeMenu, the user has
> > to start chat from the messaging menu,
>
> As Conscious user said, the IM status problem has always been a bug. The
> Gwibber problem, on the other hand, is a design f
>
> so.. what could the local relevance of "Invisible" aka "hidden" be?
> is there any?
>
In IM being invisible means that you want the world to treat you like
you were offline. That means not sending you anything, regardless of
how important it is. Invisible can be seen as the ultimate maxim
igned to be more
functional with respect to microblogging thant it is now:
https://wiki.edubuntu.org/MeMenu#Use%20cases
-Original Message-
From: Frederik Nnaji
To: Conscious User
Sent: Sat, Dec 11, 2010 2:36 am
Subject: Re: [Ayatana] Do You Use Gwibber?
On Sat, 2010-12-11 at
Well, I don't know how else "entry" could be interpreted...
-Original Message-
From: frederik.nnaji
To: Conscious User
Cc: ayatana
Sent: Fri, Dec 10, 2010 3:45 pm
Subject: Re: [Ayatana] Do You Use Gwibber?
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 17:13, Conscious User wrote:
As f
Jason, while we're at this subject, could you please tell if Unity is going to
follow the WM_CLASS "emergency fallback" that Docky currently uses?
Since Unity is going to use those big icons, I'm particularly worried
whether it will always ensure overriding small icons with large enough ones,
ev
I use Gwibber a lot.
One thing I didn't like about the Gwibber integration with the
Messaging Menu
was how it showed message-specific entries instead of box entries with
unread
counts like the Evolution integration does. Ken Van Dine recently fixed
that and
I'm very happy for that.
As for t
Finally, it would be really nice if Gwibber pulled in my most current
status update from Identi.ca and placed it into the Me menu, so I
could see what my current status is when I go to update it.
Interestingly enough, this has already been part of the specification
for a
long time now:
https:
Discussions about an eventual "progress indicator" aside, I think
this is the kind of thing modal dialogs are meant to eliminate.
http://people.freedesktop.org/~david/gnome-shell-modal-dialogs.png
-Original Message-
From: frederik.nnaji
To: Ayatana List
Sent: Mon, Dec 6, 2010 6:43 pm
> Well, with the solution presented earlier, there would not be that
> problem, because *all* apps which were not maximized would have their
> menu below the titlebar, and if you think about it, so would the
> maximized windows, only it's not just below the titlebar, it's on it.
Please do not
> 2) Even for applications with a single window, I believe cases
> where users are not interested in such association are
> frequent.
> Several users treat workspaces as extra space to be used as
> needed (Gnome shell for example was designed with that
>
Some comments:
1) Does not seem to work for applications with multiple windows
(you already know that per your comment in Launchpad)
2) Even for applications with a single window, I believe cases
where users are not interested in such association are frequent.
Several users treat workspaces as e
"Heh, yeah because that would be unbiased :p We're pretty good at
getting used to a system, even if it's inefficient, and we'll defend
that system because we are familiar with it. It doesn't mean it's a
good idea!"
I'm not talking about ***IF*** they are used to it. I'm talking about
***HOW
Before any kind of conclusions, a survey with long-time
OSX users should be made. After all, not only they use
a Global Menu all the time, but a lot of them also
have huge monitors.
Le mercredi 27 octobre 2010 à 17:23 +0200, Oscar RdG a écrit :
> Hi there,
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 5:06 PM, A
> I'd rather have the message just pop up in front of me then have to go
> through a menu. That is about as close to real life as you can get.
Disagreed. In real life, sometimes when someone calls "hey, do you have
a sec?" and you are very focused and want to finish something first,
you can tur
Frederik, I think you are confusing things. Vish didn't say the
intention was
to eliminate each and every textual information possible, just the
tooltips.
The bad situation is when an unclear icon tries to solve its
unclearness by
adding a tooltip. The problem is extra, unnecessary text, not
> I agree that the effect of the track data item is pretty undiscoverable.
> I'd love to see suggestions for that.
This is more or less one of the points I was trying to make with my
original message. Technically, it does not *need* to have an effect,
there's nothing wrong with having purely info
Le jeudi 14 octobre 2010 à 10:50 +0100, Matthew Paul Thomas a écrit :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dylan McCall wrote on 13/10/10 18:08:
> >...
> > Right now a regular menu item is used as a title in one place
> > (Rhythmbox), and an action in another (Mute). The font and
Hi,
This has been discussed before but I don't remember what
came out of it and could find the thread via Google.
Seeing how indicator-datetime shows the full date and
seeing how new independent projects like this
http://blog.rtg.in.ua/2010/10/have-you-seen-my-weather-applet.html
specifically
Le vendredi 01 octobre 2010 à 17:55 -0500, Apoorva Sharma a écrit :
> to get a text box for a broadcast account in the MeMenu, the user has
> to go to the Messaging Menu to start Gwibber.
Not true. The text box will appear if the Gwibber service is running.
If the user configures Gwibber to star
> i still suggest morphing out the info text field from the bottom of
> the indicator array..
> Replacing the indicators with a notification is also a good idea, but
> seems to me to be more of a fancy theme for our notification bubbles,
> the default imo should be near the indicators yet should
> There seems to be this idea that allowing user control is poor design.
To be more accurate, the idea is that allowing user control is often a
way to sweep problems under the rug instead of actually solving them.
Or, to put in another way, configurability is an option that makes
people stop t
Le mercredi 22 septembre 2010 à 11:01 -0400, Mark Russell a écrit :
> On 09/22/2010 06:16 AM, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I think the design of our pretty bubbles is good, implementation not yet
> > complete and i have only one flaw to comment on:
> > Notify only!
> > ATM the bubbles don't
Le vendredi 17 septembre 2010 à 16:24 -0500, Apoorva Sharma a écrit :
> I went ahead and made a mockup of my "notification in the panel" idea,
> borrowing heavily from what android does. I've attached an animated
> gif showing a basic notification popping up.
>
> I want to make it clear that the
oposes.
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Conscious User wrote:
> >
> >> I think it demonstrates a big pain point for the message indicator,
> >> really. So, we get this nice, big message in the panel and then it
> >> shrinks down to a menu item inside a l
> I think it demonstrates a big pain point for the message indicator,
> really. So, we get this nice, big message in the panel and then it
> shrinks down to a menu item inside a little icon surrounded by other
> little icons. Let's say there are a few different indicators lit up
> for different re
> I though we already established that notifications are even less
> important than the least important of the user tasks? That's the only
> possible justification for them being ethereal.
To be more clear, I think this goal is *already* being achieved quite
nicely by NotifyOSD *when mouse inte
> It always has and still appears to me that the notifications should not
> be completely ephemeral, or rather, not all notifications should be.
> Instead there should be a log of some kind where I can look up what
> happened while I was away. Maybe notifications need to come in various
> levels o
> I thought the current OSD design was based on the idea that it doesn't
> matter if you miss one notification. ;-) So what would be wrong if
> the notification was simply discarded in that case? It collided with a
> much more important action, so it's only natural that it would yield
> priority
Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 à 16:22 +0100, Michael Jonker a écrit :
> With specific reference to Unity and the notification:
>
> We need to get ready for the touchscreen market. The present logic of
> the notification is mouse-centric and will need to be overhauled for
> touch screen.
>
> In thi
Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 à 13:29 +0100, Luke Benstead a écrit :
>
>
> On 15 September 2010 17:25, Greg K Nicholson wrote:
> On 15 September 2010 16:54, Conscious User
> wrote:
> > I know it's the space for the confirmation bubbles
> A notification appears (the mouse cursor is not below the notification).
> The user is now notified. When they move their mouse to that area (bear
> in mind that they are 'notified' and have no further use for the
> graphic) it once again fades away and reappears when the cursor departs.
> This,
> My point is that a x (close) button would dismiss this
> intrusion to my focussed work immediately - or - moving the notification
> to a position I can accept will give me the best of both worlds.
Best of both worlds for your particular use case, but the truth is:
neither option is fully ideal.
I think somewhere in the NotifyOSD guidelines (can't find now), there
was the idea that moving a bubble (and therefore the entire text it
contains) is annoying for the user, so your mockup is not taking into
account the case where a notification grows, because this would
involve moving the bubble
Oops.
Only after sending my last message I realized
Vish replied only to me.
Sorry about that and please ignore it.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayata
This reply is still going to the list because it concerns the
transparency of the design process as a whole and is not
restricted to OMG-related issues.
(in my opinion)
If you don't agree, it's going to be my last. Can you point to
another list which would be more adequate?
> UIF mention of the
> And I'm not talking about the articles themselves, I'm talking about the
> comments since that was the rationale for the bug and the follow-up
> consolidate!
>
> If I'm to mention about the articles, did anyone verify if it was indeed
> the final wallpaper? It might well be! But, did anyone ve
> Backlash? Where?
> Are we now considering the above mentioned blog as a representative of
> the whole Ubuntu community? (...)
Of course not, when did I say that?
I'm comparing the current situation with previous ones about
wallpapers that also included blogs, and I'm also considering
the size
Hello,
Some of you might be already aware of the controversy caused
by the (supposed) new default wallpaper:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/08/ubuntu-1010-default-wallpaper.html
http://humphreybc.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/the-joke-that-is-mavericks-default-wallpaper/
https://bugs.launchpad.net/u
> Because GTK sliders are consistent with the scrollbars in behavior.
But this can be worked around, I suppose, since Rhythmbox's and
Totem's playback sliders can be clicked to a specific point. Or
are those different widgets?
___
Mailing list: https
> It's on my radar for ConnectionManager that there should be a standard
> API for telling whether there is an Internet connection or not, and for
> invoking a troubleshooting assistant if there isn't. Then Web browsers,
> e-mail programs, IM clients, and so on can integrate it as suits their
> in
While I like the AppMenu and I'm currently using it on Maverick even
for the desktop (and I have a large resolution), I have to agree that
"unified experience" is not a good argument in this case. If it was,
there wouldn't be the need for a netbook edition at all.
Le lundi 16 août 2010 à 18:33 +
> Wow. This is the single neatest suggestion I've seen on the Ayatana
> list. I particularly like the echoing of standard web presentation in
> the menu, to cue users as to the purpose of the field.
>
> The rest of the thread has further good ideas, so I'm not +1'ing this
> mockup as a final posi
> I agree with the auto-hide to save screen space, but having it
> reappear on proximity would be a pain - it shares space with most web
> pages navigation bar, so it would often get in the middle of browsing.
>
> A better option for a hidden bar is the one supported by Firefox
> Mobile ("Fennec"
> I've changed my mind: this is not a problem! So what if the text box
> has focus automatically? That's a hidden feature. The text goes away
> if you click on the box, but also when you just start typing after
> opening the menu. These features co-exist. Explanatory text in a text
> box seems to
Le mardi 29 juin 2010 à 15:54 +0200, Igor Vatavuk a écrit :
> Hi, ayatana list!
> Perhaps the text above the text-box should be in the form of a question,
> similar to how Facebook, Identica and Twitter ask.
> "What's on your mind?" or something like that.
> Since Me-menu shows the text-box only
> Actually I was suggesting we *don't* use different icons for the
> MeMenu title and menu items. While colour would be useful as it's used
> elsewhere (eg Empathy client) it conflicts with the specific meaning
> colour has in the menu bar. And using mixed monochromatic/colour icons
> for the menu
> I still think it's unclear what that text box does. I made a quick
> mockup which adds some text to the text boxes, explaining what they
> are supposed to do. This text goes away when the text box is
> activated. The social networking text box says "Post Twitter
> message..." when the Twitter ic
> Yes, the "broadcast field" is certainly a learnable feature in the
> MeMenu.
> It will make publishing your current thought to the world very
> comfortable, i'm sure.
> But please somebody help me understand why i have a field to publicly
> log my thoughts next to IM presence status settings, w
> I think this does quite a lot for clearing up the purpose of that field.
> But if you just look at that without prior/external knowledge, you still
> would have to ask: Say where? To whom?
I agree. In fact, seconds after sending the mockup I wondered if it
wouldn't confuse users into thinking i
Hello,
So I've been thinking: a big problem with the Me Menu
comes from the fact that there is not an universally
recognized word for the act of microblogging. There
are "tweets", "dents", and Facebook made the rather
poor choice of using "status updates" (increasing
the confusion with IMs)
One
> I think that makes two of two implementations that nicely illustrate the
> concern that CSD is harmful for workspace consistency.
I have to agree on this one. Visual inconsistency is one of the oldest
complaints against Songbird.
___
Mailing list:
> In due course, similar capabilities will be added. But for the moment
> it's minimalist.
Here's me hoping that those similar capabilities will be implemented
in a neat d-bus service way which follows an app-independent protocol,
thus closing one of the most common complaints against the current
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
