Re: Brief descriptions in menu entries
> A standard install of Debian will not result in more than one or two
> browsers.
Remember also that, compared to Windows, GNU/Linux systems are more
frequently used as multi-user systems. Here you do find examples of systems
with lots of software installed (everything that the many users want) and
yet with plenty of newbies at the terminals.
> > And at any rate, window managers designed for hard-core users are free
> > to ignore the genericname entry, just like they all ignore longtitle
> > ATM.
> > However, environments such as KDE that already include generic names in
> > their menu entries can make use of the generic name field to their
> > advantage.
>
> They *already* do that, from what you say. I don't see an advantage
> yet.
They only do that for native KDE/GNOME apps. KDE and GNOME have no way
of divining the generic name from the debian menu entry, which is at
least where KDE gets its information from for non-native-KDE apps.
(And indeed, this is where it should get its information from since this
is what the debian menu system is for).
Adding genericname to debian menu entries would allow KDE/GNOME to
provide a consistent experience by adding generic names to all menu
entries, not just native ones. That's an advantage.
And again, it doesn't have to impact your favourite slick and minimalist
window manager - no WM would be forced to use this genericname field.
> Something like this will affect the usability of Debian-- negatively, IME.
I still don't see the big negative impact. Environments that it doesn't
suit don't need to use this information. Environments that have
*already* decided to include generic names (such as KDE) can have this
information for all apps, not just native KDE apps.
> Also, remember: the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".
This might explain to you why my anecdote began with "FWIW" and not with
"As irrefutable proof".
Ben. :)
Reply to: