ubuntu-manual team mailing list archive

[Joel Pickett <jpickett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Tony Pursell
<ajp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>
>
> On 11 July 2012 16:25, <jimandmarcy@xxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
> +1 the panel

Regards,

Joel Pickett