1 |
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> R0b0t1 posted on Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:27:35 -0500 as excerpted: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> >> I actually really like the ux-* idea. So much so I wish I'd thought of |
6 |
> >> it. =:^) It doesn't come across as nearly as "tired and worn out" as |
7 |
> >> "gui-*" does, here (tho I already see a reply from someone else with |
8 |
> >> the opposite reaction, favoring desktop-* over ux-*). |
9 |
> |
10 |
|
11 |
Pedants will note that UI (user interface) and UX (user experience) are |
12 |
different things and for the described purpose of package categories, |
13 |
neither one fits, at all. |
14 |
|
15 |
ui-apps: Don't all "apps" have UIs, whether X11, Wayland, ncurses, slang, |
16 |
plain text, or etc.? |
17 |
ux-apps: What does this even mean? UX refers to the way a user interacts |
18 |
with an application, not the application itself. |