Re: electronics-menu REJECTED (discussion)
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:39:03AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I think the good solution is a new "technical" menu with optional
> > submenus appearing when it becomes too large. If you can agree on the
> > structure of this menu and make it fit as much as possible to existing
> > XDG categories, it could be easily added.
Le Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:34:10PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt a écrit :
> I opened #339305 requesting gnome-menus add a ham radio menu more than
> two years ago and unfortunately the maintainer has not responded at all.
Le Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:48:33PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt a écrit :
> It appears that the Technical menu should include at least;
> - Science
> - Engineering
> - Math
> - HamRadio
> - Electronics
Le Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 02:22:19PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> And here we have good chances for a flame because I as a user would
> not expect Science and Math under a main menu "Technical". I'd rather
> see "Science" as a main menu entry and find "Math" below this. I
> do not say that my point of view is correct but there is no "correct"
> location for the sections and it mainly depends from users view where
> he might search for certain topics. That's my arguing for grouping
> users according to their views and care for them in sub projects
> were you are able to do reasonable guessings where a user would
> suspect certain applications. This was one sense for the Debian-Med
> project because every user of this project will definitely enter
> the "Med" main menu and can easily proceed from there. For these
> users the "Technical" menu section would be of low use.
Le Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 03:32:07PM +0100, José L. Redrejo Rodríguez a écrit :
> And another flame decission chance comes when you have to decide if an
> application should be under , e.g., Education/electronics or
> Technical/Electronics. As an example, where do you think qucs[1] should
> be placed? It's wonderfull to study at a deep level how solid state
> circuits work, but also wonderful for secondary school children to study
> and simulate digital and analogic circuits...
Hi all,
Some people use Debian to learn, and some other to work. I think that
the people who work do not expect their tools in the "Educational" menu,
even if their salary is payed by a university. My understanding of
"Educational" tools is programs whose sole purpose is to learn and
study, otherwise we should move OpenOffice in "Educational" in the
computers used for training people at the use of office software.
Then, the question wether some tools are scientifical or technical is in
my opinion unsolvable. I would favor a Science & Technique menu if this
is not tool long in terms of number of characters. Acutally, is is a bit
frustrating that the software developpers who wrote the standard have
given a menu entry to their own professional tools, "Development", while
other professions have not this facility (except for secretaries and
graphists). Maybe we simply need a "Pro" mode in the menus, that are
obviously very "Home"… but this makes us far from our original goal.
I have updated the wiki page http://wiki.debian.org/ExtraMenus with some
details from the standard and some parts of the current discussion. If
we want to keep things simple, and if mechanisms exist to automatically
create sub-menus using the "Additional" categories (see the wiki) when
there are too many entries, I would propose to keep things as simple as
possible and to promote 'Science & Technics' as a "Main" category.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian-Med packaging team
Reply to: