Frans Englich frans.englich at telia.com
Mon Nov 14 11:44:57 GMT 2005

On Thursday 10 November 2005 19:55, Dave Rowe wrote:
> On Thu, November 10, 2005 1:48 pm, Martin Koller wrote:
> > ...
> > We should better use something like "rarely used options", which
> > describes why
> > those option have been put in a second level, and this has absolutely
> > nothing
> > to do with the skill of the user!
> >
> > And it reflects the reality: Some options are not needed for doing the
> > main
> > tasks, but are here to fine-tune some aspects of a program (maybe "fine
> > tune"
> > might also be another good word for such a sub-section in a dialog).
> > ...
> Why not 'Additional Options'?  It neither reflects on the user's knowledge
> level,

Good point, that's a big problem with "advanced": it divides options into how 
difficult they are to use, not from what they do and what the user wants to 

> nor negatively groups the options in question... 
> In my opinion, using words like 'Fine Tune' (which doesn't necessarily
> mean 'rarely used') seem like a waste of time.  Name the options what they
> are...Additional Options.

I think "Additional Options" is good, but "Detailed Options" expresses even 
more that the options in questions are not central.

I've been thinking about this change before, and what I think's needed is just 
to do it, in the right way: 1) coordinate with the HIG team to get the 
documents updated & consistent; 2) Locate the relevant applications in SVN to 
change(the difficult task); 3) change them; 4) blog and make other noise 
about it such that developers are aware of the change.



More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list