On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Tony Pursell <a...@princeswalk.fsnet.co.uk>wrote:
> > > On 11 July 2012 16:25, <jimandma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I believe our path to a resolution lies not in what >we< think is right, >> or what a majority of a group thinks is right, but what the end user thinks >> is right. >> >> Let me explain. >> >> There are several shades of blue (electric blue, navy blue, indigo >> blue...to name a few). But generally, these variations of blue are accepted >> as "blue" for (and because of) a variety of reasons. But then we have CYAN. >> Is it blue? Well, to a generalist, yes. To ME, yes. But to a lithographer, >> or a printer manufacturer, or a photographer, or a user replacing a printer >> cartridge, CYAN is a very specific color mix, so to them, and for their >> purposes, and in their opinion, CYAN is NOT blue. Printer manufacturers >> have labeled this color as CYAN, all the printer cartridge manufacturers >> call the color CYAN, therefore, the user searches for a replacement CYAN >> (not BLUE) printer cartridge. >> >> My point. >> >> We may say the "top bar" represents one thing while the "menu bar" >> represents another, and we can debate about the denotation and connotation >> of the identifiers, but we've not asked the (arguably) more question yet >> "what is generally accepted?" And by answering that question, we will know >> what the user will expect, and by knowing what the user expects, we'll all >> be speaking the same language. While the "Ubuntu Manual Project" is an >> excellent resource filling a specific niche market, it is not a "definitive >> guide to using Ubuntu". The UMP is a generalist publication for those >> wanting to get into Ubuntu but don't want to wade through a 500-page >> "official manual". We're more of a 150-page "quick start guide". This being >> the case, we should be in the mindset not to determine and define screen >> element names, but to support that which has already been defined for us. >> >> A discussion amongst ourselves is good, and healthy, but if we determine >> that a "top bar" is "X" while other manuals, websites, tutorials, etc. >> identify it as "Y", are we best serving the overall community by presenting >> these contradictions in print? >> >> My recommendation is that we define screen elements the same as the >> Official Ubuntu Manual defines them...right or wrong. We may even need to >> coordinate with them...or even contact Canonical directly for input in >> answering some of these questions. In the interest of serving the user >> base, it's best that all we are all 100% right or 100% wrong. Anything less >> adds confusion to the user, and, in the end, detracts from the overall >> impressiveness of the user supported documentation and--I would argue--the >> Ubuntu OS in general. >> >> --Jim >> >> >> I agree entirely with this last point by Jim. As far as I know this was > called *the panel* when Unity was designed. We must not go off and name > it something else if this is against the 'official' name. Just because we > find it called by other names elsewhere, that does not justify us going off > and renaming it. For instance, there might be references to 'the menu bar' > but that is what the similar object was called in GNOME, so the help for > GNOME applets may still use this terminology. We must consult with the > wider community before we come to a decision on this. > > Tony > > PS - I cannot post to the other mailing lists... > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual > Post to : ubuntu-manual@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > +1 the panel Regards, Joel Pickett
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual Post to : ubuntu-manual@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
