Menu Specification Comments

[Heinrich Wendel]

On Monday 16 June 2003 12:41, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Monday 16 June 2003 12:12, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 10:55:46AM +0200, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > > On Monday 16 June 2003 10:35, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 07:07:21PM +0200, Heinrich Wendel wrote:
> > > > > KidsGame (A game for kids)
> > > >
> > > > Why should these be differentiated?
> > >
> > > That is the nice part of this new standard. If you want to have them
> > > all lumped together you can achieve that by choosing a proper set of
> > > criteria in your applications.menu file while other people can choose
> > > to have them in sub-menus of their own. Just because you don't need it
> > > as category doesn't mean others don't need it either.
> >
> > But how do you define a kids game?
>
> "A game aimed at children"
>
> > Getting back to the character thing,
> > does the same game with Tux instead of Elmo make it not a kids game?
> >
> > Is it about age? If so, how do you define a kids game? For kids <5y, <7y,
> > <10y? Who'll says some 7y old kid isn't capable of playing some
> > card/logic/whatever game which at the same time may be perceived as hard
> > even by certain adults?
>
> It's not about rating, it's about intention. I can use OpenOffice as a code
> editor, does that make it a development tool or IDE?
>
> > > > > Debugger (A code debugger)
> > > >
> > > > Is it necessary to specify this beyond "Development"?
> > > >
> > > > > DevTool (A development tool)
> > > >
> > > > And how is this different from "Development"?
> > >
> > > Why should it be different? It is a refinement.
> >
> > As for "Debugger" I agree it is, although I'm somewhat opposed to it on
> > grounds of the `overcategorization' thing.
>
> You need some level of "overcategorization" in order to create
> opportunities to actually make different menu arrangements.
>
> > However, what refinement is "DevTool - A development tool" over
> > "Development - An application for development"?
>
> That one does indeed add little value.

Well this one seems really stupid, but for the othere I really think they have 
a value.


>
> Cheers,
> Waldo
Heinrich :)