>>>>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:34:35 -0500, Sean Middleditch >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was rumoured to have said:
> On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 16:20, Stelios Bounanos wrote: >> > Ugh - if that Workrave screenshot is recent, someone should file a bug >> > that they aren't HIG compliant in the least, either. I just tried, but >> > I'm not going thru the effort of creating Yet Another Bugzilla Account >> > for one little app I never use. ;-) >> >> Workrave is not part of GNOME2, so I don't see why non-compliance to >> GNOME's HIG is a bug. Do you think authors of unrelated (but perhaps >> GNOME-aware) software should be pressured into doing gnome-type UIs >> Am I missing something here? > Yes - creating non-HIG compliant GNOME-based applications is just > silly. It's really no more difficult either way, and one way gives you > a clean, consistant, easy to use UI, while the other gives you some > hacked up only-understood-by-you mess. The HIG's purpose isn't to > declare what the GNOME desktop should act like, it's purpose is to > provide guidelines for applications authors to make good programs that > don't have crap UIs. Personally, I'm sick of havin to spend inordinate > amount of time guessing what authors intended with their UI. A solid > set of standards help this; authors actually *using* them makes life > nice. > This is probably the worst part of the HIG - it's not clearly designated > and evangelized to application authors until they try to get their app > into GNOME core. I try to do my part by placing bugs on every app I see > that fails to do so, and so far, the authors all are quite happy to make > their app more user-friendly and sexy. ;-) I see what you mean. I still have mixed feelings about GNOME's HIG, and the UI changes in GNOME2 in particular, but the consistency is definitely a good thing... >> >> >> >> >> Ross >> > -- >> > Sean Middleditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Rgds, /-sb.
