Closed Bug 56995 Opened 24 years ago Closed 15 years ago

Application name should not be included in window title

Categories

(SeaMonkey :: UI Design, defect)

PowerPC
macOS
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED
seamonkey2.0b2

People

(Reporter: mpt, Assigned: stefanh)

References

(Blocks 2 open bugs)

Details

(Keywords: platform-parity)

Attachments

(4 files, 6 obsolete files)

To reproduce: * Open the attached testcase. * Look at the title bar. What you should see: * `Public enemy number one'. What you actually see: * `Public enemy number one - Mozilla'. Advertising the name of the program in the title bar is completely redundant, since: * it gives the impression that the application is just a visitor on the user's system (cf. file managers, which don't include `Windows Explorer' or `Finder' in the titles of their folder windows); * on Mac OS, the name of the application is visible in the application menu anyway; * in all Mozilla applications, the title bar is already used for other things, which are usually quite long to begin with (e.g. Web page titles, message subject lines); * this is an open-source project, and as such should not subject users to constant advertising for a program they are already running. Occurs with: * Build 2000101620, Mac OS 9.0 Does not occur with: * any other document-based application I have ever seen on the Mac, except for previous versions of Mozilla. This bug will depend on other bugs which make sure that the window title always has some content.
Attached file testcase
I disagree that the appname should not be appended to the page title in Windows. Every application I've ever used has had its name in the titlebar, and it would be quite odd if, for example, a page had `Microsoft Internet Explorer' as its title and that's all we put in the titlebar. This should be mac-only, and maybe linux as well.
Two other points, in response to yours: * I don't see the name in the titlebar as `advertising', and I don't think too many other users would either. Why are we advertising a product they're already using? I think of it more as program identification, a quick reference to the app name without a visit to the about dialog. * Windows Explorer does not just give directory or file information in the titlebar, it is prepended by "Exploring -". It doesn't need really need to say the full `Windows Explorer' because the user thinks of it as another integrated part of Windows (as indicated by its interface's conformance to the rest of the OS UI, and lack of a specific about box -- it just uses the global Windows one), and it's really not a separate application.
[Third attempt at entering this ...] Adding dependency: This bug needs to be fixed before bug 36305 (proxy icon in title bar) will make sense from a UI perspective. Response to Blake's points: > Every application I've ever used has had its name in the titlebar The latest version of MSN Explorer for Windows doesn't, it just has the title of the page. The start of a trend? I certainly hope so. > it would be quite odd if, for example, a page had `Microsoft Internet > Explorer' as its title and that's all we put in the titlebar Maybe, but there is much less scope for that kind of titlebar pratfall than there is scope for the kind of titlebar pratfall shown by my testcase. > Why are we advertising a product they're already using? Exactly. > I think of it more as program identification, a quick reference to the app > name In an ideal world, users do not need to care which app they are using. This is an almost completely painless step towards that ideal world. If a user needs to know which app they are using, they can use the About box. (In such cases they'll likely need to know the version number too, information which the title bar will normally not provide anyway.) There is no need to clutter their display with the app name all of the rest of the time, when they do not need to see it. > Windows Explorer does not just give directory or file information in the > titlebar, it is prepended by "Exploring -". In the normal case, where you double-click on a disk or folder icon on your desktop, this is not true; only the folder name is shown. `Exploring -' indicates a particular view mode of Windows Explorer, in the same way that an app might append `(Read-Only)' to the title. It is not really anything to do with the app name. > the user thinks of it as another integrated part of Windows Exactly. That's what we should be aiming for -- an interface which the user does not notice, because it just blends in with the rest of the system.
Blocks: 36305
Depends on: 56993
I asked why we'd be advertising a product they're already using to (hopefully) show that the user doesn't think we are, not to prove the point that we shouldn't be. In most (if not all) other non-Internet-related applications, the `title' in `titlebar' is the app title; not <title>bar. We would be redefining the role of the titlebar if we did this. When you double click on a folder, what appears is just a window showing the folder contents. This isn't really a separate application, and I think it's to the user that they aren't launching a new application when they do that. We don't currently blend in with the system at all, and I think some other changes would have to be made to make the app integrate more before we do this, if that's our goal. Personally, I think a better justification for doing this would be to unify the browser chrome and the webpage (which, iirc, was one of the original goals pf the product). In other words, the browser chrome would just be extended navigation of the webpage displayed in the content area, and thus it would make sense to only display the webpage title in the titlebar, because the user thinks he's looking at one entity -- a webpage. But we're really nowhere near this full integration (and I'm not sure that we're even headed in that direction - are we still trying to design the chrome according to web look and feel?)
On the Mac (at least) the title bar should only contain the document title--regardless of whether Mozilla is considered app-centric or document-centric.
How about making it a preferences?
I will shoot myself if you make this a preference.
For now i'm marking this as mac only. Comments?
Hardware: All → Macintosh
*sigh* Ok, Mac only then. But I predict you'll be doing this on Windows too within three years. :-)
Keywords: pp
akkana, d'you think the application name should be in the titlebar of unix mozilla/n6 windows? since i prefer less clutter in general, i wouldn't mind it going away. but i don't have strong feelings about this...
Not that big a deal to me really, but since you asked: I like having the name of the app in the titlebar: I don't actually care that it's in the titlebar itself (if I can see the titlebar, I can see the window and figure out what app it is) but that also makes it show up in the application list as a Mozilla or Netscape window. When I'm choosing from a long list of minimized windows trying to find my browser window, it can be quite difficult if the window is listed as "Files" or "My page" or " " (blank) or other such titles one commonly sees on the web.
I think Matthew is a man before his time. -> Future, maybe I'll look into this for mac at some point.
Target Milestone: --- → Future
Blocks: 73812
Looks like there is pretty strong agreement that at least on the Mac, the application name should not appear in the window title. Shouldn't this be a pretty easy code change to make?
This is assembled here: http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/xpfe/appshell/src/ nsContentTreeOwner.cpp#567 but unfortunately we can't just #ifdef XP_MAC in this file, we'd need to fix it in the DTDs and in general these are locale specific and not plaform specific everywhere.
See also bug 80735, "Build id in window title lowers usability".
*** Bug 107695 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Nominating for Mozilla 1.0.
Keywords: mozilla1.0
Attached patch Quick fix I use myself (obsolete) — Splinter Review
I attached a quick patch that works for me and removes 33 chars from the title. I don't expect this to be checked in. I'm just attaching it in case someone wants to use it in a personal build and doesn't want to search for the right source line to zap.
From the comments in this, and bug 80735, it becomes obvious this is a personal preferance. So why not a pref that would be OFF by default (for the reasons stated in 80735), which would remove " - Mozilla {Build ID: XXXXXXXXXX}" from the title? Also, I don't feel this depends on 56993, as a blank title isn't the end of the world.
Attached patch Patch for making it a pref (obsolete) — Splinter Review
I'm attaching a patch for making this a pref. With the pref set the effect is the same as with attachment 57300 [details] [diff] [review] on the Mac but with the pref service overhead. Both patches zap both " - Mozilla" and the build id. However, the build ID is still available on about:blank. If you want either patch to go in, you'll need to convince Asa and MPT that build ID on about:blank is enough. I'd prefer attachment 57300 [details] [diff] [review] which just zaps the extra stuff on the Mac and doesn't access the pref service.
..or rather, I'd prefer zapping " - Mozilla" and the build ID on other platforms, too. I don't like the extra stuff on Linux and Solaris, either.
Keywords: mozilla1.0mozilla0.9.8
smfr (or one of the other super reviewers, but I think it was him) told me #ifdef XP_MAC is not acceptable in that file ... so the pref thing is probably better. I think this is probably called quite a lot (this is a guess), so I'm not convinced its a great idea to read from the prefs service every time. The two ways of fixing that would be to use an instance variable, or something like the admitedly ugly local static approach static bool needToGetPref = true static bool userWantsTitle = true if (!needToGetPref){ userWantsTitle = pref service lookup ... needToGetPref = false; } The instance variable approach is much cleaner, naturally it should actually be a class variable (static) if its the same for all windows... Come up with a fix to that stuff and I will r=. (obviously we can make this platform specific by setting the pref to different defaults on each platform. If you go that route, you need to include that in the patch too).
I just measured henri's patch. Using a pref takes ~1 tick (this is Mac OS 10, on a G4 400mhz) and its called twice every time we open a window. I'm not sure exactly what the ticksize is on mac os x, but its either 1 millisecond or less. So ignore my earlier comment. That said, aparently Asa will block any patch which removes the build id from the title bar, so we'll have to change the DTDs. sigh...
Must...resist...making a...derisory...comment...
This patch builds on Henri's. It makes it a pref, turns that pref on only on Mac OS (so all other platforms keep "Mozilla" or "Netscape" in the name. It also *preserves* the buildid in the titlebar in Mozilla builds, regardless of the setting of the pref on any given platform. Obviously in commercial Netscape builds, we get the desired effect, which is the window title is the document title with no embelishments. Everyone satisfied? If you want to flip the pref on Linux/Windows, please argue about that somewhere other than this bug.
Attachment #57300 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #60323 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Keywords: review
LordPixel, does the pref also turn off the titlemodifiermenuseparator (" - ") from displaying if the buildName is turned off? It should, since the buildID will already be "seperated" by the curly brackets. Also, be sure this takes effect on Mac OS X as well.
Yes, I noticed the problem with the hyphen this morning. I'll fix the patch later when I have more time. Also, I test on mac os x first.
Attached patch Fixes the hyphenation issue (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #61868 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Alternative solution 1/ remove "- Mozilla" on Mac OS only 2/ move "{buildid: XXXXXXXXXXXX}" into the menubar on all platforms. I add it to the name of "Debug" menu, so the menu is called "Debug {buildid: XXXXXXXXXX}" This is highly visible, and it means Moz has nice window titles on Mac OS. Came up with this idea chatting to timeless earlier today.
Nominating for Mozilla 1.1. Can we get this patch reviewed and into the beta, or does it need to wait for 1.2? (Does this really depend on bug 56993?)
Keywords: mozilla0.9.8mozilla1.1
What if I have an "IE" skin for Mozilla, and the same page loaded in Moz and IE... how do I tell which application is which? What other application doesn't name themselves in the window title? That's what it's *for*. Document <title> is secondary.
> What if I have an "IE" skin for Mozilla, and the same page loaded in Moz > and IE... how do I tell which application is which? - Doctor, doctor, it hurts when I do this! - Don't do it then. It is silly that Mozilla should include additional cruft in the title bar in order to let users of an IE theme distinguish between Mozilla and IE. If you want then to be distinguishable, don't use a theme that makes them indistinguishable. Like, duh. > What other application doesn't name themselves in the window title? > That's what it's *for*. I'm guessing you are a Windows user. Opera 6 doesn't show the app name in the title bar when run in the SDI mode on Windows XP. I can distinguish between Mozilla, Opera and IE because their UIs aren't identical and they all have distinct icons in the top left corder of the windows and in the Taskbar. On the Classic Mac OS and on Mac OS X, Netscape and Mozilla are the only apps whose windows have the app name in the title bar even though there is a document title. So how do I know which app I'm looking at? First of all, apps don't look exactly *identical*, even though they are supposed to look *similar* to each other. Secondly, the app name is displayed in the menu bar (which is the platform convention). When I'm looking at the window listings in the Dock, the window titles are grouped by app, so including the app name in the window titles is useless and adds clutter. In the GTK/Gnome world, things are usually less consistent than on Mac. A quick sampling shows that there are apps that don't include the app name in document windows and then there are those that do. The GIMP and Dia (whose accessory windows could be considered relatively Mac-like) don't have the app name in the title bar of document windows. Gnumeric and AbiWord (whose UI design could be considered more Windows-like) have the app name in the title bar. It is worth noting, though, that AbiWord also exists on Windows and that might affect the UI. Galeon has the app name in the title bar, but that could be considered to be just Mozilla influence. Again, the fact that the UIs of different apps aren't identical, even though they are similar, is enough for me to figure out which app I'm looking at. When the window titles show up in the Gnome Panel, they are prefixed with distinct icons that let me know which app they belong to.
in the future, mozilla and ie will probably both put site icons into the system menu instead of app/document icons, this means that the visual queue you suggest will be gone. mpt suggests that users won't, don't and shouldn't care which app is doing the rendering. that's certainly one view. if you want to know which is doing it, then help>about (windows) will tell you. [for MacOS you'd just check the multifinder area, and for MacOSX you'd check the app menu]
Assignee: ben → lordpixel
Konqueror put a favicon in Gnome Panel. I didn't like it. Which icon would you use when the Taskbar on Windows XP or the Gnome Panel groups Mozilla windows?
app icon, which would probably be a lizard/raptor/M. but you really don't want to think about this (this is partially an unsettled legal issue) as it's probably the job of that app (taskbar/panel) to pick the icon, i don't think there's an attribute they look for. -- I could be wrong in which case you should definitely correct me :)
[change keyword since Mozilla 1.1 has already been released]
What is the status of this patch? Is it still up to date? Will it make it into mozilla1.2?
Keywords: helpwanted
adt:nsbeta1-
Keywords: nsbeta1nsbeta1-
No longer depends on: 56993
this is a patch to remove " - Mozilla" from the titlebar on the mac, based on attachment 62648 [details] [diff] [review]. i didn't look at moving the build id to the debug or QA menu, because that's a wee bit beyond my current knowledge of mozilla. (-: suggestions / revisions would be appreciated. thanks.
Attachment #61897 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #62648 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
taking
Assignee: lordpixel → lbenne01
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Assignee: lbenne01 → guifeatures
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
i didn't read all of this, but it seemed to me that people are only talking about advertisement. i think i've got an interresting point to add. i have a mouse with 2 thumbbuttons and i'm using imwheel to make them work as "back" and "forward" keys. imwheel translates the 6th and 7th mousebutton to another event depending on the window title that the mouse action happend on. so i vote for the Mozilla in the title.
Product: Core → Mozilla Application Suite
, or patch review? Both Seamonkey and FF continue to lack the application icon on window titlebars on Mac (bug 107695 duped to this).
QA Contact: bugzilla
Filter "spam" on "guifeatures-nobody-20080610".
Assignee: guifeatures → nobody
QA Contact: guifeatures
Component: XP Apps: GUI Features → UI Design
Depends on: 457548
I'll do mailNews et al once bug 457548 is resolved.
Assignee: nobody → stefanh
Severity: enhancement → normal
OS: All → Mac OS X
Priority: P3 → --
Target Milestone: Future → seamonkey2.0a2
Attached patch Patch for mailNews (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Just attaching a patch for mailNews.
Neil, are you OK with this? Afaics, this is the only window (that isn't a "main" window) that has "- SeaMonkey" appended to the title. My idea is that in order to be consistent with the other windows win/nix should be happy with this change too.
Attachment #355846 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #355846 - Flags: review?(neil)
Attachment #355846 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #355846 - Flags: superreview+
Attachment #355846 - Flags: review?(neil)
Attachment #355846 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 355846 [details] [diff] [review] Remove appName from viewPartialSource.xul (pushed) I guess this is OK. (Regular view source does have a - SeaMonkey, but then again you can even browse in it these days!)
Comment on attachment 355846 [details] [diff] [review] Remove appName from viewPartialSource.xul (pushed) Pushed this to comm-central as changeset 2421d18c3a24.
Attachment #355846 - Attachment description: Remove appName from viewPartialSource.xul → Remove appName from viewPartialSource.xul (pushed)
Comment on attachment 344144 [details] [diff] [review] Patch for mailNews I think we can do this now, after this it's onlt browser left.
Attachment #344144 - Flags: review?(mnyromyr)
Comment on attachment 344144 [details] [diff] [review] Patch for mailNews (This is identical to how Thunderbird does it, btw)
Attachment #344144 - Flags: review?(mnyromyr) → review+
Comment on attachment 344144 [details] [diff] [review] Patch for mailNews Looks sane (for Mac at least).
Attachment #344144 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #357723 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #344144 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #357723 - Flags: superreview?(neil) → superreview+
Comment on attachment 357723 [details] [diff] [review] New version without ifdef'ing (pushed) Pushed this as changeset ef7223d5becb. I'll leave this open until browser windows are fixed.
Attachment #357723 - Attachment description: New version without ifdef'ing → New version without ifdef'ing (pushed)
Attachment #344144 - Attachment is obsolete: true
I fixed the browser in bug 457548.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: seamonkey2.0a2 → seamonkey2.0b2
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: