[Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx>]

Guy Harris wrote:

> On Feb 9, 2004, at 10:06 AM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
>
> > Well, that's odd! Why using "status bar" but "toolbar"? Is there any  
> > reason behind this?
> > I had a short look at the GNOME HIG, and they name it exactly that way.
>
>
> I guess it depends on whose HIG (and software) are being used.
>
> The Apple HIG for Mac OS X refers to "toolbar(s)"; it didn't refer to 
> a  "status bar" in any obvious place, but the Cocoa documentation 
> appears  to refer to "status bar(s)" (and that's what Safari calls it 
> in the  View menu).
>
> The KDE User Interface Guidelines can't seem to make up its mind:
>
>     http://developer.kde.org/documentation/standards/kde/style/toolbar/ 
> index.html
>
> "The classic toolbar is a buttonbar. KDE toolbars can also  contain  
> other widgets, e. g., labels, line edits, combo  boxes, and frames  
> (which can contain everything else!).
>
> The tool bar offers a quick way to invoke actions that are  used  
> frequently. Remember: all actions should be  accessible through the  
> menu bar - don't have an action  in the toolbar that isn't also in 
> the  menubar!"
>
>     http://developer.kde.org/documentation/standards/kde/style/statusbar/ 
> index.html
>
> "Statusbar
>
> The status bar is for displaying information on the state of the  
> document  you are working on. Typically you will have more than one  
> field for  information in the bar. The first of these inserted will  
> have their  size fixed and the last will span the remaining width of  
> the window."
>
> whereas Microsquish appears to use "toolbar" and "status bar":
>
>     http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ 
> dnwue/html/ch08d.asp
Hmmmm, but does it make *any* sense to use it seperated for one term and 
together for some other (but very similar one)?

Regardless of that, it sounds to me, that we should name it, as you 
suggested earlier: "toolbar" and "status bar"

Regards, ULFL