GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 311353
gswitchit: please use long description instead of short description
Last modified: 2005-07-24 08:52:13 UTC
Hi, Matijs van Zuijlen reported in Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/319605 that some schemes are undistinguishable via their shortDescription. I propose using the normal description, and will attach the trivial patch. Here's what the submitter proposed: > I currently see the following possible solutions: >. > - Make xfree86.xml (or rather, xorg.xml) contain unique short descriptions > for every keyboard layout and variant (Doesn't seem likely, since at > least the English short descriptions seem to standardize on three-letter > abbreviations). > - Add some disambiguation in the indicator if necessary given the user's > configuration. These could be either numbers (not so nice), or the name > field, like so: USA (us); USA (en_US); USA (us_intl), or, when using the > intl variant of the us layout (I don't know why there are two of them): > USA (intl). > - Allow the user to set the display string (This would be rather awkward, I > suppose). Bye,
Created attachment 49632 [details] [review] normal description instead of short description (Makes the applet a bit long in the panel though.)
Loic, you are absolutely right saying 'a bit long in the panel'. Actually, I introduced the shortDescription field into the xml format just in order to make the applet usable. With the long description, it would take TOO much space. I don't want it. Regarding the uniqueness of the shortDescriptions - it can be discussed but I'd like to put some restrictions here: 1. User should not see layout/variant IDs. It is internal technical information (like primary keys in the database) 2. The IDs should be short (no longer than 5 symbols, I'd say). Sure, if you still think that longDescription is a WTG - you can raise the question in desktop-devel-list.
What do you think of: > - Add some disambiguation in the indicator if necessary given the user's > configuration. These could be either numbers (not so nice), or the name > field, like so: USA (us); USA (en_US); USA (us_intl), or, when using the > intl variant of the us layout (I don't know why there are two of them): > USA (intl). As I understand it, this would mean use short descriptions when no confusion if possible, and add something discriminatory when necessary, such as the name, or maybe switch to the normal description when two short descriptions are identical. Would that be acceptable?
OK, let's consider two scenarious. First, I am using Russian and US layout. No confision, just 'USA' and 'Rus' - short descriptions work ok. Next, let's talk about some Canadian who would use two variants (Multilingual, first and second). You are right, now he should feel uncomfortable seeing 'Can' all the way. What would be the solution allowing to distinguish two variants? Can(1) / Can(2)? Can(XX) / Can(YY) - what would you see as XX and YY? max(strlen(XX)) = 3 Something else?
For strlen(XX) <= 3, I can only think of numbers. :-/ Since the description is in the right click menu, I think that's completely acceptable.
OK, I generally agree. So if you have time right now to implement it - you are very welcome. Unless I find time to do it in a next week or so.
(Reopening.)
I made it even shorter. Right now, I see on my screen the sequence: USA Can Can* Can** At least people would be able to distinguish. And it is still compact. Objections?
Looks fine to me, you rock!