project to get desktop items to follow HIG so it can get included in FC3

[Kristof Vansant]

I was thinking: if we just put all the package there Name=, GenericName=, 
Comment= lines
(only the english version) on a wiki and let people add a better name, 
genericname, etc following the HIG.

http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/desktop-integration.html

After 2 months the best one's are selected. Then people can start 
translating it to there language.
After 3 months after the freezing date. So after there translated. The 
results are put in .desktop files and send to the maintainers.
With maintainers I mean the programme and the package maintainers.
This will let other distro's also profit from this effort.

example: send gimp.desktop to gimp fedora and gimp

Wiki example:

xchat.desktop
original:
Name=IRC Client
GenericName=IRC Client
Comment=X-Chat

lupus:
Name=X-Chat IRC Client
GenericName=IRC Client
Comment=For chatting on IRC

PS: if everything goes to plan the new desktop files can be in FC3

Lupus (Kristof Vansant Belgium)

_________________________________________________________________
Vraag van de week: Welk soort project zou jij financieel ondersteunen? 
http://www.msn.be/microsoft/potential/default.asp

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 09:34:52AM +0000, Kristof Vansant wrote:
>  After 3 months after the freezing date. So after there translated.
> The 
>  results are put in .desktop files and send to the maintainers. 
Most of the GNOME
packages should already use a internationalization mechanism
(intltool) upstream; if they are not using it, they should. Maintaining
desktop file translations separately is error-prone and the translations
will probably get stale (new translators are very likely not to notice
that they need to update the desktop file, and manual adding of the
translations puts a burden on the maintaner).

I don't know how KDE does it, but the desktop files come translated
from upstream too :)
	Mirek

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 09:34 +0000, Kristof Vansant wrote:
>  xchat.desktop
>  original:
>  Name=IRC Client
>  GenericName=IRC Client
>  Comment=X-Chat
>  
>  lupus:
>  Name=X-Chat IRC Client
>  GenericName=IRC Client
>  Comment=For chatting on IRC 
It is absurd that you shouldn't put X-Chat or lupus into Name=

Likewise, it is absurd if these fields are not handled like they should.

On my FC2t3+updates, I have the following info on Evolution:

Name=Evolution Email
GenericName=
Comment=Send email and manage your schedule

Shouldn't this be:
Name=Evolution
GenericName=Email
Comment=Send email and manage your schedule

???

It should. And it should display something debatable like:

   Name GenericName
   Comment

But if fields have names, then these names have meanings, right? :)
The meanings should be respected, and fix the software if needed, but
don't invert the meanings on account of software bugs as if that is the
solution. Fix the bugs.

Rui

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 11:01:23AM +0100, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
>  On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 09:34 +0000, Kristof Vansant wrote:
>  Likewise, it is absurd if these fields are not handled like they should.
>  
>  On my FC2t3+updates, I have the following info on Evolution:
>  
>  Name=Evolution Email
>  GenericName=
>  Comment=Send email and manage your schedule
>  
>  Shouldn't this be:
>  Name=Evolution
>  GenericName=Email
>  Comment=Send email and manage your schedule 
No.
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/desktop-integration.html#...

>  And it should display something debatable like:
>  
>     Name GenericName
>     Comment 
See
http://lists.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2002-August/msg00000.html
and the followups.

>  But if fields have names, then these names have meanings, right? :)
Yes, but not necessarily the "obvious" meanings. 

The current menu spec does not mention this issue at all, maybe it's
time to add something there. But that discussion belongs on xdg-list,
or whatever it is called now.
	Mirek

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 12:27 +0200, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
>  On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 11:01:23AM +0100, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
>  > On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 09:34 +0000, Kristof Vansant wrote:
>  > Likewise, it is absurd if these fields are not handled like they should