On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:09:33 -0800, "David E. Ross" <[email protected]> in mozilla.support.seamonkey wrote:
>On 11/1/2009 10:02 PM, Hartmut Figge wrote: >> David E. Ross: >>> On 11/1/2009 6:29 PM, Phillip Jones wrote: >> >> [about:config] >>>> But it can be useful in the hands of an _experienced_ user >> >> Yes. >> >>> And it could be vitally necessary for developers and testers. >> >> Vital? No, you can always use the user.js. ;) >> >> Hartmut > >The "it" to which I referred would be a preference variable dictionary, >a document for humans and not a file for software. As a retired >software test engineer, I know that data dictionaries were very, very >important to both developers and testers in the projects on which I >worked. A preference variable dictionary would be very similar and have >a similar role. And just as we did not keep our data dictionaries >secret from our end-users, a preference variable dictionary should not >be kept from SeaMonkey users. Levels of user usage.............. This is an old message, but what the heck............. Some people are only concerned 'that' something works. They really don't care 'how' it works. And having a glimmer to some level of the 'how' makes the upper things a lot easier to deal with. But the 'how' has several levels too. So which level do you want to hang your hat on? "User.js" is not the end file. If I remember correctly it is an auxiliary file to prefs.js. Prefs.js is read into memory when the application is booted and pulls in user.js as a tag-a-long to be made a part thereof. Or maybe they are two different physical memory files or maybe it really doesn't make any difference to the guy who only cares 'that' it works. The whole thing is concept with physical underpinnings........ There are dictionaries of pref.js parameters on the web, and the ones I have seen will tell you right up front they are not complete -- but my experience is that they have a lot more information that than the gui interface or 'help' will give you. I would say more real, but that depends on what you consider 'real' to be -- real is a level. Someone said that Seamonkey was 'too complicated' for Firefox users. How many are aware that in past releases they basically ran the same way. What is "basically"? On one level, you could say that the BIOS and the OS are "basically" the same, just on different levels......... However, in the case of SM (previously Netscape) and Firefox I am talking about some base files being exactly or largely interchangeable........... This is mostly only by observation, and reading, that I know this so maybe the elephant is really much like a snake.......... Personally, i bemoan what is considered "computer literate" today....... I run five main browsers, more if you include linux,solaris, etc., and on one level, they are all the same, only in different clothes, on another level they are often unique. I often have questions that someone else knows the answer to and for that I am grateful. Right now I am stymied by the SMTP-AUTH problem in the SM2.0 release. I do not know the answer, and in that case i am only concerned 'that' it works. It worked fine in the Beta version..... I also think it is ridiculous to release something with such a major bug..... Somebody knows the answer I seek.............. It's all so simple, i'm sure......... jim ends his epistle for today......... -- Many years ago, about 1979 or '80, an issue of Computer Weekly had a cover reading "the Black Art of Systems Programming" the story said that the way things were going that we would end up with only a small group of people who actually knew "how" things worked in computerland. That story has proved correct.............. _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
