Menu
▾
▴
scrollkeeper-devel
|
From: Allin C. <cot...@wf...> - 2002-08-24 18:02:00
|
Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have Accessories Desktop Preferences Games Graphics Internet Office Programming Sound and Video System Tools I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the current tree. Allin Cottrell. |
|
From: Sander V. <San...@Su...> - 2002-08-24 18:22:40
|
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the > canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have > > Accessories > Desktop Preferences > Games > Graphics > Internet > Office > Programming > Sound and Video > System Tools > > I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and > Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) > program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the > current tree. > Hi! I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are categories for educational and scientific apps (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) subcatoegories. OTOH possibly I'm the confused one and we want to duplicate that part of the tree under GNOME ? > Allin Cottrell. > Sander This is the place where all the junkies go where time gets fast but everything gets slow |
|
From: Allin C. <cot...@wf...> - 2002-08-24 18:58:49
|
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Sander Vesik wrote: > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > > > Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the > > canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have... > > I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and > > Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) > > program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the > > current tree. > > I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs > 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are > categories for educational and scientific apps > (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither > have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) > subcatoegories. Ah, I take your point. Perhaps I should go under Applications, not Gnome/Applications. It's a bit lonely in there right now. ;-) Allin Cottrell. |
|
From: Sander V. <San...@Su...> - 2002-08-24 19:43:54
|
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Sander Vesik wrote: > > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > > > > > Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the > > > canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have... > > > > I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and > > > Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) > > > program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the > > > current tree. > > > > I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs > > 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are > > categories for educational and scientific apps > > (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither > > have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) > > subcatoegories. > > Ah, I take your point. Perhaps I should go under Applications, not > Gnome/Applications. It's a bit lonely in there right now. ;-) > Yes, unfortunately not many applications have seenthe light yet and started providing documentation that integrates with scrollkeeper yet. > Allin Cottrell. > Sander This is the place where all the junkies go where time gets fast but everything gets slow |
|
From: Mikael H. <mi...@co...> - 2002-08-24 21:55:46
|
l=F6r 2002-08-24 klockan 21.43 skrev Sander Vesik: > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: >=20 > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Sander Vesik wrote: > >=20 > > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > > > > > > > Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the > > > > canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have... > >=20 > > > > I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and > > > > Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) > > > > program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the > > > > current tree. > > > > > > I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs > > > 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are > > > categories for educational and scientific apps > > > (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither > > > have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) > > > subcatoegories. > >=20 > > Ah, I take your point. Perhaps I should go under Applications, not > > Gnome/Applications. It's a bit lonely in there right now. ;-) > >=20 >=20 > Yes, unfortunately not many applications have seenthe light yet and > started providing documentation that integrates with scrollkeeper yet. Rather noone really knows where they should put there documents. We have a GNOME/Applications/* with several categories in. Should stuff be placed there or should it be places somewhere else? I'm not really sure what the KDE and GNOME categories are for. Currently I special give special treatment to the GNOME category. I kinda agrees with Havoc here, that we should not distinct so much between GNOME and KDE. _But_ for the desktop it will be a mess if KDE docs and GNOME docs got messed up. Ie. if we had a Desktop/Panel, and both KDE and GNOME put there panel docs there :) Perhaps we should go over it all and make sure that nothing but the "core" is in GNOME/. If we are this discussion should be moved to the gnome-doc-list. CC'ing there now. Regards, Mikael Hallendal >=20 > > Allin Cottrell. > >=20 >=20 > Sander >=20 > This is the place where all > the junkies go=09 > where time gets fast > but everything gets slow >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=3Dsourceforge1&refcode1=3Dvs3390 > _______________________________________________ > Scrollkeeper-devel mailing list > Scr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scrollkeeper-devel >=20 --=20 Mikael Hallendal mi...@co... CodeFactory AB http://www.codefactory.se/ Office: +46 (0)8 587 583 05 Cell: +46 (0)709 718 918 |
|
From: Andrew S. <an...@so...> - 2002-08-25 07:30:28
|
On Sat, 2002-08-24 at 22:55, Mikael Hallendal wrote: > l=F6r 2002-08-24 klockan 21.43 skrev Sander Vesik: > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > >=20 > > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Sander Vesik wrote: > > >=20 > > > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Allin Cottrell wrote: > > > > > > > > > Can I suggest adding a few more Application categories to the > > > > > canonical Gnome tree for scrollkeeper? At present we have... > > >=20 > > > > > I think we could do with, say, Education(al?), Scientific and > > > > > Other. I'm developer of an econometrics (economic statistics) > > > > > program and I can't find a sensible place for its docs in the > > > > > current tree. > > > > > > > > I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs > > > > 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are > > > > categories for educational and scientific apps > > > > (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither > > > > have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) > > > > subcatoegories. > > >=20 > > > Ah, I take your point. Perhaps I should go under Applications, not > > > Gnome/Applications. It's a bit lonely in there right now. ;-) > > >=20 > >=20 > > Yes, unfortunately not many applications have seenthe light yet and > > started providing documentation that integrates with scrollkeeper yet. >=20 > Rather noone really knows where they should put there documents. We have > a GNOME/Applications/* with several categories in. Should stuff be > placed there or should it be places somewhere else? >=20 > I'm not really sure what the KDE and GNOME categories are for. Currently > I special give special treatment to the GNOME category. I kinda agrees > with Havoc here, that we should not distinct so much between GNOME and > KDE. _But_ for the desktop it will be a mess if KDE docs and GNOME docs > got messed up. Ie. if we had a Desktop/Panel, and both KDE and GNOME put > there panel docs there :) >=20 > Perhaps we should go over it all and make sure that nothing but the > "core" is in GNOME/. If we are this discussion should be moved to the > gnome-doc-list. CC'ing there now. I would expect only "very-gnome" items to be under GNOME. That's the panel, nautilus, capplets, applets. The end user may not care that gedit is developed by the gnome project - it's a text editor, an app, and should be under Applications in the same place as kedit, emacs, kate and so on. Same job, same place. >=20 > Regards, > Mikael Hallendal > >=20 > > > Allin Cottrell. > > >=20 > >=20 > > Sander > >=20 > > This is the place where all > > the junkies go=09 > > where time gets fast > > but everything gets slow > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=3Dsourceforge1&refcode1=3Dvs3390 > > _______________________________________________ > > Scrollkeeper-devel mailing list > > Scr...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scrollkeeper-devel > >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Hallendal mi...@co... > CodeFactory AB http://www.codefactory.se/ > Office: +46 (0)8 587 583 05 Cell: +46 (0)709 718 918 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > gnome-doc-list mailing list > gno...@gn... > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list >=20 --=20 Andrew "Someone needs to make a 'woops' command that reverts the hard disk to the state it was in 20 seconds ago." -- me |
|
From: Allin C. <cot...@wf...> - 2002-08-25 00:41:47
|
On 24 Aug 2002, Andrew Sobala wrote: [just a few excerpts from previous posts along the way] > > > > > I think a potential source of confusion here is 'gnome docs' vs > > > > > 'docs for programs running under gnome'. For application there are > > > > > categories for educational and scientific apps > > > > > (ApplicationsEducational & ApplicationsScientific), though neither > > > > > have Economics (or for that matter Linguistics, Sociology, etc) > > > > > subcatoegories. > > > > Rather noone really knows where they should put there documents. We have > > a GNOME/Applications/* with several categories in. Should stuff be > > placed there or should it be places somewhere else? > > I would expect only "very-gnome" items to be under GNOME. That's the > panel, nautilus, capplets, applets. > > The end user may not care that gedit is developed by the gnome > project - it's a text editor, an app, and should be under > Applications in the same place as kedit, emacs, kate and so on. Same > job, same place. I think this is a good point. At present the non-gnome category in yelp (on my system, anyway, sans KDE) is pretty much empty apart from the man and info sections. That's what made me think my app (which is designed to play nicely with gnome) should go under Gnome. But in the long view it probably should not, and the gnome section should be restricted to programs which are, as you say, "very-gnome". This would argue for moving not only gedit but also gdict, the system monitor (procman), and other apps that are not part of the "gnome apparatus" as such and could be used on any system that has the gnome libs installed. While we're at it, the gnome desktop configuration stuff should not be under "Applications" in the gnome menus, but under "Settings". Allin Cottrell. |