Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
Am Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:00:05 +0200 schrieb Mathias Hasselmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, The pure existence of GTK_RESPONSE_YES, GTK_RESPONSE_NO, GTK_STOCK_YES and GTK_STOCK_NO encourages creation of horrible user interfaces. One recent example is on Planet GNOME right now[1]. Other examples were posted on Planet GNOME in the past, and still exist in applications like OpenOffice.org. So I wonder if we should deprecated those symbols, in the hope that people obey the GNOME HIG and properly label the buttons of their message dialogs. Hey, you did find a really nasty example there indeed. Would you like to continue ignoring those warnings does not only pose a rather bad question, it also includes a small secondary icon and a secondary message that looks simply confusing. However I have doubts that deprecating these stock icons can help much here. Even if the buttons weren't there, chances are that the developer still uses Yes and No labels, or if he, say chooses Ignore and Don't ignore instead and keeps the confusing layout with mutiple messages and multiple icons, the situation isn't much different from before. Just my two euro cents, Christian ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
2008/8/25 Mathias Hasselmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, The pure existence of GTK_RESPONSE_YES, GTK_RESPONSE_NO, GTK_STOCK_YES and GTK_STOCK_NO encourages creation of horrible user interfaces. What a terrible idea! First, GTK_RESPONSE_YES and GTK_RESPONSE_NO do not imply much about user interfaces, good or bad. They are response codes, nothing else, and can be paired with any GTK_STOCK_* in full observance of the HIG. Second, for GTK_STOCK_YES and GTK_STOCK_NO, do you really want to break a pile of GTK applications just because they run afoul of a related project's (i.e., Gnome's) guide lines? Note: guide lines are not strict rules. (For the record, I seem to have lots of _RESPONSE_ lying around, but no _STOCK_ ones. Unless they are somehow hidden in glade files.) Morten ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
Morten Welinder wrote: 2008/8/25 Mathias Hasselmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, The pure existence of GTK_RESPONSE_YES, GTK_RESPONSE_NO, GTK_STOCK_YES and GTK_STOCK_NO encourages creation of horrible user interfaces. [..] (For the record, I seem to have lots of _RESPONSE_ lying around, but no _STOCK_ ones. Unless they are somehow hidden in glade files.) You can easily find out by doing a grep for gtk- on all your .glade files. Johan ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
At the least, any Yes/No stuff in the API reference documentation should have a note saying that they are generally a bad idea, probably with a link to the GNOME HIG. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
Am Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:38 +0200 schrieb Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED]: At the least, any Yes/No stuff in the API reference documentation should have a note saying that they are generally a bad idea, probably with a link to the GNOME HIG. If we want to keep people from doing stupid things I agree, the API reference should just point out very expressly that one shouldn't use these buttons deliberately. I wouldn't assert so strongly that Yes and No are generally a bad idea, though. I think there are appropriate use cases. ciao, Christian ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Christian Dywan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:38 +0200 schrieb Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED]: At the least, any Yes/No stuff in the API reference documentation should have a note saying that they are generally a bad idea, probably with a link to the GNOME HIG. If we want to keep people from doing stupid things I agree, the API reference should just point out very expressly that one shouldn't use these buttons deliberately. I wouldn't assert so strongly that Yes and No are generally a bad idea, though. I think there are appropriate use cases. I'd be ok with adding a paragraph somewhere in the api docs that points out the benefit of following some interface guidelines, and maybe pointing at the gnome HIG as an example. I don't think the docs for YES/NO are the ideal place for that, though... ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: RFC: Deprecate GTK_{RESPONSE,STOCK}_{YES,NO}
Am Montag, den 25.08.2008, 14:12 +0200 schrieb Murray Cumming: At the least, any Yes/No stuff in the API reference documentation should have a note saying that they are generally a bad idea, probably with a link to the GNOME HIG. And also, please mention that some languages don't even have proper equivalents for yes and no (IIRC, welsh [1]). [1] http://www.croeso-betws.org.uk/iaith/phrases.htm Regards, Sven ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
