About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
Hello, there is a discussion [1] on the internationalization mailing list about GNOME 3 core application names, the ambiguous situation they bring, and the difficulties it brings for translation. I try to summarize to the best the issue. Read the thread [1] and contact people for more information. The main objective with simple object based application names [2] is understood. It makes a clear link between the application name and the core object it deals with, this with the objective to make meaning for the users. In opposition Nautilus, Epiphany, Evolution does not make meaning for new users. This scheme works very well in an application list, or on a window title. A novice user identifies easily and clearly what it is all about. However it also brings several issues. For example Copyright 2003-1012 The Web Developers, which sounds like Developers of the World Wide Web. This is even more confusing in French (at least), where web (the www) is written Web with upper case. See also [3]. Notifications say Open with Files when an external drive is plugged in. It is actually not clear that Files is an application. Therefore the questions : - shall we keep the application names untranslated (like trademarks or person names)? But then we miss out the original goal: make meaning for the users. - shall we use explicit functional names like File manager, Web browser? Everywhere? Or only in places where the meaning is functional or where there is less context? (like notifications etc.) - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it be made more explicit for example with adding GNOME, like in Copyright 2012 - the GNOME app name Developers? - Shouldn't we may expect that users (even the users at the lowest imaginable level) are able to remember some application names? - etc. PLEASE NOTE that the issue is not lost in translation, it amplifies in translation. Shorts one-word names can work somehow in English, but can be very awkward and/or ambiguous in various languages. [1] TO: internationalization mailing list Subject: Confusion over epiphany new name Archive: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-i18n/2012-March/msg00078.html [2] https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/ [3] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=671831 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: [...] - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it be made more explicit for example with adding GNOME, like in Copyright 2012 - the GNOME app name Developers? IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright holders. IANAL. -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:20:32AM -0700, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: [...] - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it be made more explicit for example with adding GNOME, like in Copyright 2012 - the GNOME app name Developers? IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright holders. Trademark issue, not copyright. And you should not be able to trademark such generic names. With the exception if you are a big company it seems :P -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Anyone interested in keeping pessulus alive?
Hi, Pessulus was a configuration lockdown editor for GNOME 2. It never got ported to GNOME 3, as it more or less involves a complete rewrite (move to introspection-based bindings and move to GSettings) and nobody found the motivation to do so. Unless someone steps up within a week to become maintainer, I'll move pessulus to our archives. Thanks, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Anyone interested in keeping pessulus alive?
On Mar 12, 2012 6:00 AM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote: Hi, Pessulus was a configuration lockdown editor for GNOME 2. It never got ported to GNOME 3, as it more or less involves a complete rewrite (move to introspection-based bindings and move to GSettings) and nobody found the motivation to do so. Oh, that is just too bad. I would think that this would be useful in large installations. I hope someone take up the challenge to port it. Sri Unless someone steps up within a week to become maintainer, I'll move pessulus to our archives. Thanks, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 09:32 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:20:32AM -0700, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: [...] - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it be made more explicit for example with adding GNOME, like in Copyright 2012 - the GNOME app name Developers? IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright holders. Trademark issue, not copyright. And you should not be able to trademark such generic names. With the exception if you are a big company it seems :P I meant GPL violations, which is copyright. -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
Sounds like the issue comes out of text strings referring to the applications, not from copyright/trademark issues with the names themselves. I guess I would recommend this approach: Copyright statement copyright 2012 Gnome Web Browser copyright 2012 Gnome Files or copyright 2012 Gnome File Manager and the other Open with file manager or Open with file browser After all, isn't this really a matter of context? Also, wouldn't this be similar to Open Office/Libre Office? They use somewhat generic names for the different apps in the suite. I can't imagine that their copyright line for Open Office Writer is copyright 2012 Writer can it be? Another example is Apple's apps for OSX: Mail Calendar Finder and they usually identify them as applications rather than the respective nouns by adding .app at the end: Mail.app Calendar.app and Finder.app. Of course, Linux doesn't have such a specific file extension for user-accessible applications, but I think using Gnome Mail and Apple Mail would be a very similar solution to the problem. Just my two cents. Jason Simanek ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Anyone interested in keeping pessulus alive?
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:51 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: Pessulus was a configuration lockdown editor for GNOME 2. It never got ported to GNOME 3, as it more or less involves a complete rewrite (move to introspection-based bindings and move to GSettings) and nobody found the motivation to do so. Oh, that is just too bad. I would think that this would be useful in large installations. I hope someone take up the challenge to port it. Potential summer of code project? -- Danielle Madeley Software Developer, Collabora Ltd. Melbourne, Australia www.collabora.co.uk ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Anyone interested in keeping pessulus alive?
I will *definitely* need this for my job (to implement GNOME 3 desktop in enterprise), so I can try to port it - and maintain it too, if necessary. I'm student too (for last year it seems), so I can try to pick it up as GSoC project too. If lucky, it could be win-win (and third win for people who still want such functionality). Peteris. 2012. gada 13. marts 00:06 Danielle Madeley danielle.made...@collabora.co.uk rakstīja: On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:51 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: Pessulus was a configuration lockdown editor for GNOME 2. It never got ported to GNOME 3, as it more or less involves a complete rewrite (move to introspection-based bindings and move to GSettings) and nobody found the motivation to do so. Oh, that is just too bad. I would think that this would be useful in large installations. I hope someone take up the challenge to port it. Potential summer of code project? -- Danielle Madeley Software Developer, Collabora Ltd. Melbourne, Australia www.collabora.co.uk ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- mortigi tempo Pēteris Krišjānis ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
