Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
GNU is Not Unix GNOME GUI KDE

KDE And Gnome Cooperate On Interface Guidelines 317

An anonymous reader submits "Competing infrastructures may foster improvement in each desktop, but the Gnome and KDE hackers still know how to work together when needed. The Free *nix desktop has been improving quickly. Red Hat's unified desktop was controversial, but obviously the right decision for regular users. Now that KDE and Gnome have decided to combine their Human Interface Guides, it can be done right--by the developers themselves. Note: they also want to involve 'people working on other non-KDE non-GNOME HIGs.'" Update: 02/03 20:19 GMT by T : Apparently not everyone's browser can read http://freedesktop.org, so the initial link up there now sports a "www" as well. And it's .org -- sorry.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

KDE And Gnome Cooperate On Interface Guidelines

Comments Filter:
  • mistaken (Score:4, Informative)

    by Boromir son of Faram ( 645464 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @03:46PM (#5217068) Homepage
    Actually, they are just hosting both of the sets of guidelines on the same site, not agreeing on one set of guidelines for both toolkits. In the end, this is a good thing, because the two widget sets are radically different on a few key points, making agreement on human interface guidelines fundamentally improbable.

    It is a sign; the free desktop guidelines were sent to us to aid in our defense.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 03, 2003 @03:46PM (#5217076)
    start here [apple.com]

    finally ego's are starting to subside and we are working together. i have dreamt about this for years, a common human interface guide, that will work consistently. i do not need 100 differnt ways to do something.. nor do i need 100 different widget sets. i just want something that works the same way every time
  • by Dan Ost ( 415913 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @03:49PM (#5217095)
    I know this was probably ment in jest, but just
    in case you were serious, you should have a look
    at the various mailing lists. I think that you
    would find that there has always been a fair
    amount of cooperation between developers of the
    two projects.
  • by TheFrood ( 163934 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @03:51PM (#5217122) Homepage Journal
    The article makes it sound like KDE and GNOME are going to share the same set of interface guidelines. In fact, if you read the linked letter, you'll see that they're only planning to co-locate the HIGs for the two desktops.

    The goal seems to be to make it easier for developers to access the different HIGs for the two desktops, not to create a single HIG for both desktops.

    TheFrood
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:03PM (#5217212)
    Should be .org. .com is some crappy ad site.
  • by chrysrobyn ( 106763 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:05PM (#5217227)

    Please note the corrected URL points to www.freedesktop.org, while the old one was freedesktop.org, NOT freedesktop.com.

    If we can't keep the org/net/com/new TLD of the day straight, how can we expect others who just want it to work to keep it straight?

  • Error in correction (Score:3, Informative)

    by wowbagger ( 69688 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:07PM (#5217247) Homepage Journal
    The URLs ares
    freedesktop.org [freedesktop.org] and www.freedesktop.org [freedesktop.org]

    not freedesktop.com [freedesktop.com] and www.freedesktop.com [freedesktop.com]

    which seem to be placeholders for a domain squatter.

  • by jordan_a ( 139457 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:11PM (#5217278)
    Having a shared document will also allow us to start looking at commonalities
    between the documents and perhaps create common chapters or sections on basic
    guidelines and lessons that are desktop and toolkit-independent


    The end goal of all of this is to create a single HIG for both desktops.
  • by Roberto ( 1777 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:14PM (#5217301) Homepage
    Well, you can do it like this. I will give a KDE example, because I am more familiar with it.

    a) Start using KDE
    b) Find an app whose UI you think needs work
    c) Politely contact the app author, offering your help
    d) Don't barge in saying "hey, fool, this is how it's done" ala Eugenia Loli-Queru from osnews.com
    e) Try hacking a better UI through Qt designer (it's pretty easy, and if you are lucky, you won't even need to rebuild the app).
    f) Volunteer to take bugreports regarding UI for that app
    g) Don't propose changes that would involve huge refactoring and throwing away of code. If you do, noone will care, and you will be frustrated.

    That is about it.
  • UI Review (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:15PM (#5217315)
    Hello readers,

    Please allow me to introduce you my UI review which I've written a couple of days ago. It explains various aspects of the current GNOME GUI situation and illustrates them by using a bunch of pictures. I think posting this here is a good idea so you as programmer get a sight of the whole situation that personally I see. This text has been discussed with the members of the GNOME germany community on IRC and various other members of the GNOME community that work directly or indirectly with the modules on CVS. It has been read, verified and signed to be a good source of information. I really like to encourage you to read this so you can avoid problems within your future projects if you see the system as a whole. This text can be found here [gnome.org] and was sent to the mailinglist which can be read here [gnome.org] and last bot not least OSNews.com announced it big on their mainpage where many people can read and comment about it here [osnews.com]. A copy of the text has been sent to Bill, Callum and Seth.

    In case you read the text already. Let me encourage you to read it again because I made some heavily updates to it (also verified by the community).

    Greetings.

    oGALAXYo
  • freedestop.com is not freedesktop.org
  • browser? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Lxy ( 80823 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:28PM (#5217399) Journal
    Too bad Timothy has no idea WTF he's talking about.

    Apparently not everyone's browser can read http://freedesktop.com

    Not only is freedesktop.com -NOT- the site in the article, but the browser has nothing to do with it.

    $ ping freedesktop.org
    ping: unknown host freedesktop.org
    $ ping www.freedesktop.org
    PING freedesktop.redhat.com (66.187.233.246) from 192.168.0.3

    Under Timothy's logic, my version of BASH can't read it either. I'd better upgrade to Windows Explorer or something more "standard".

    Timothy:
    It's a server config issue. Whoever admins freedesktop.org (Redhat apparently) doesn't understand Apache config well enough to allow requests for http://freedesktop.org. Is it you by chance?
  • by generic-man ( 33649 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:39PM (#5217531) Homepage Journal
    Not likely. Apple stopped [apple.com] reading [apple.com] those [apple.com] guidelines years ago.
  • Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <{ajs} {at} {ajs.com}> on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:43PM (#5217571) Homepage Journal
    If KDE/Gnome can just come up with something unique and useful , and chuck the Win98-ish crap

    This is exactly the opposite direction from what is being done, and for good reason. Right now, the focus is not on re-inventing everything, but figuring out where the common elements of GNOME and KDE's HIG's can be merged, and also where they are unique. Then an effort to merge those last chunks can procede by actually changing the two where appropriate.

    Also, you may not realize just what an HIG is. It actually has very little to do with what you *see* so much as how you see it. Check out the GNOME HIG [gnome.org] for more details. This specifies things like what buttons you should put on an alert dialog; when you should use modal vs non-modal windows; default keyboard shortcuts and menu names; etc.

    If all you want is a more BeOS, MacOS, etc. looking desktop, or even a totally unique look, you can do that within the constraints of the HIG of either GNOME or KDE.

    From the announcement:

    Having a shared document will also allow us to start looking at commonalities between the documents and perhaps create common chapters or sections on basic guidelines and lessons that are desktop and toolkit-independent (e.g., accessibility and internationalization tips, general usability principles).
  • Re:mistaken (Score:5, Informative)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <{ajs} {at} {ajs.com}> on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:45PM (#5217594) Homepage Journal
    Incorrect. They are combining the two documents into one, with sections that conflict annotated in XML such that either document can be viewed as a stand-alone. Then they are going to work on the differences.

    Read the announcement on the mailing list archives.
  • by Pius II. ( 525191 ) <PiusII@g m x . de> on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:48PM (#5217628)
    Maybe you should just read the Gnome User Interface Guidelines (http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/) , which could easily win an award for the most blatantly obvious copy of someone else's original work (i.e. they are almost identical to the Apple HIG). At least they exchanged the graphics; having Aqua windows in there probably would have been _too_ obvious.
    I'm really glad that those guidelines are actually being implemented, because that makes Gnome really easy to use (as opposed to KDE, which seems to try and imitate MS. I hate those "Yes, No, Cancel" dialogues).

    http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/wi ndows.html#alerts-confirmation
  • by ajs ( 35943 ) <{ajs} {at} {ajs.com}> on Monday February 03, 2003 @04:50PM (#5217649) Homepage Journal
    Check out the GNOME HIG [gnome.org] and the effort linked to by this article to combine with KDE's interface guidelines. Certainly those are good places to start.
  • by ajs ( 35943 ) <{ajs} {at} {ajs.com}> on Monday February 03, 2003 @05:03PM (#5217774) Homepage Journal
    I have to disagree. First, a good HIG does not constrain you to do the wrong thing for your application, but rather gives you a sense of how best to fit into a particular paradigm. From there, you can do what you need to. A classic example of where this is important is the current trend in "media players" like Quicktime from Apple, WinAmp, XMMS, Microsoft Media Player, etc. They all try to look as snazzy as possible, at the cost of good user interface design. I can't count the number of times I've been at a party where some geek with good intentions put up an XMMS or WinAmp-based juke-box for people to play music with and all of the non-techies would give up after a few minutes because they couldn't decipher the UI.

    If those applications had followed the UI guidelines for the platforms they run on, they could still have had all of the features, all of the great flexibility, but they didn't need to have pseudo-round volume sliders, non-standard title-bars that do application-local window management, context-sensitive menus that don't have commonly-performed operations, out-of-the-box unique font selection, out-of-the-box unique color selection, etc, etc.

    That kind of awful behavior is what makes a desktop unusable (and certainly if more apps go the "branded UI" route, dekstops will become totally unusable).
  • by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Monday February 03, 2003 @05:22PM (#5217950)


    Work is underway to give OpenOffice first a Quartz interface then a full Aqua interface. The current OpenOffice for the Mac depends on X11 and is clearly labeled as a "Developer's Pre-release".


    OpenOffice on OS X only exists in it's current form so that the backend code (common to all ports - filters and so forth) can be debugged insofar as the non-GUI parts don't like Darwin. Once the core is solid and clean on Darwin then it will get an interface that is more pleasing. If they had to make a native interface for it before doing anything else, it would take much longer for a solid OS X port. The roadmap is here [openoffice.org].


    You're larger point may be valid but the OSX port of OpenOffice (as it currently stands) is not a valid example.

  • by Guy Harris ( 3803 ) <guy@alum.mit.edu> on Monday February 03, 2003 @06:06PM (#5218394)
    "See, use Ctrl+C (sometimes?), but if you're in a console, just highlight it... But don't highlight anything otherwise, or you'll lose whats in your clipboard".

    Those are two different mechanisms; Ctrl+C is "copy to clipboard", and you then paste from the clipboard, but "just highlight it" is followed by the middle-mouse-button "paste current selection".

    I'd personally be a bit annoyed if Ctrl+C in a terminal window copied the selection to the clipboard rather than sending a ^C down the pseudo-terminal to interrupt the current program - but I'd be similarly annoyed if it did that in the terminal windows on a certain non-UNIX operating system [microsoft.com] as well. (In that OS, at least in the 5.0 version of the "New Technology" flavor of that OS, you can either select "Edit->Copy" on the window menu or, apparently, use the "Enter" key - I guess "Enter" acts as a CR/LF only if nothing is selected.)

    And what about PASTING! Highlighting to overwrite in one sequence copies what you highlighted to your clipboard (overwriting your precious clipboard text)!

    Not in any desktop that implements its primary and clipboard selections according to the X clipboard explanation [freedesktop.org], which says "selecting but with no explicit copy should only set PRIMARY, never CLIPBOARD."

    The problem here is that people have gotten confused about what the "clipboard" is. The clipboard is not what selecting something with the mouse changes and not what your middle mouse button pastes. Selecting with the mouse changes the primary selection, and the middle mouse button pastes the primary selection. "Copy" copies the primary selection to the clipboard; merely selecting something doesn't, it just changes the primary selection to refer to what you selected. "Paste" inserts the contents of the clipboard in place of the current selection (which could be a "zero-length" selection, in which case it amounts to inserting at the point of the selection, e.g. insert at the text cursor in a text window).

    (As I remember, the KDE people spoke of them both as "clipboards" when discussing the KDE 3.0/Qt 3.0 change to make the primary selection and clipboard work that way, in order to, I guess, avoid confusing people whose brains had become too locked into the notion of the middle mouse button pasting some kind of "clipboard"; however, the X11 Inter-Client Communication Conventions Manual calls the primary selection PRIMARY and the clipboard CLIPBOARD.)

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...