[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fwd: Re: Gnome Icons, Gnome/KDE Menus need improvement]



On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 15:08, Seth Nickell wrote:
> Upstream GNOME and KDE should include both Name and GenericName tags,
> but the reason is so they are translated so upstream distributors can
> easily choose whether to use the Branded Name[TM] or the GenericName for
> a particular item.

Keep in mind, we don't have a way at the moment to toggle whether to use
Name or GenericName on a per-.desktop-file basis. We'll need to engineer
a way to do this.

The simplest hack of course is to just munge GenericName over the top of
Name using desktop-file-install.

Also, as an aside, I don't think the HIG is very clear on when to use
"Web Browser" and when to use "Foo Web Browser" ... your mail implies
this is a "desktop core" vs. "not core" kind of line, the HIG with
Bryan's revisions implies it's "whether there are multiple
alternatives," etc.

The HIG should document unambiguously what 3rd party, upstream, and ISV
app developers should put in the .desktop file...

Another issue we need to address is getting this name consistent across
the package manager, the .desktop file, and what's displayed in the app
itself (titlebar, about dialog), currently these are not consistent.
Some kind of automated relationship between .desktop file and package
manager / installer display would be good. We could potentially have the
libraries automatically g_set_application_name() from the .desktop file,
also.

Havoc




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]