On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 16:14, George wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 04:03:49PM +0000, Thomas Leonard wrote:
> > The problem is that the comment tells me nothing I couldn't work out from
> > the name (and I still have no clue what this file is).
> >
> > The original entry:
> >
> > <comment>Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine image</comment>
> >
> > looks like it would be much more useful to a user wanting to know what
> > 'Image.dcm' is. If you want it shorter, perhaps something like "medical
> > image"?
> >
> > Likewise, image/svg+xml ("SVG image") could perhaps be "scalable image"?
>
> Yes, I think this is important. This is sort of like me calling the socket
> protocol SUP and the fifo protocol SOP. Other people have no clue what I'm
> talking about, and it really just makes me looks smarter then I am (or like
> an idiot, I can't decide). However if it's something that's exposed to the
> user, it should be "usable". The user should not need to be educated in all
> the abbreviations that geeks use to use the computer.
"Scalable SVG image"
"Medical DCM image"
?
--
Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part