Sign of the Gnome 3 apocalypse?

[drago01]

2012/3/27 夜神　岩男 <supergiantpotato at yahoo.co.jp>:
>
>
> --- On Tue, 2012/3/27, drago01 <drago01 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2012/3/27 夜神　岩男 <supergiantpotato at yahoo.co.jp>:
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Tue, 2012/3/27, drago01 <drago01 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> No.
>> >>
>> > If you say so... but I'd like to point out that having a place where an application "might or might not" place some controls depending on a condition that is not obvious to the user makes me think this is some unneccessary and avoidable ambiguity in the interface, and I think that's what Tom was getting at.
>>
>> No that's not the purpose of the application menu.
>> It is about splitting application specific controls away from window
>> specific ones. Which makes a lot of sense to me.
>
> I can understand that, and leaving it up to the application is definitely the right thing to do -- but pushing it to a dock-ish location sometimes, but not always, is perhaps at least an awkward move, if not a wrong one.

Well the "not always" is due to backwards compatibly apps have to make
use of the new API, the App menu only had a "quit" item before now we
added an API to allow apps to put application specific controls there.

> But I can appreciate the train of thought. We'll see how it plays out. On the other hand, traditional applications have done this by presenting application-wide controls in whatever seemed the "main window" and left peripheral windows without menus or with really specific ones. GIMP is a good example of that, come to think of it.

Sure some apps invented there own way to solve this. The application
menus are a way to standardize this so it is less "random"  i.e to fix
the problem you actually complain about ;)