Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Feb 2009 14:07 UTC
Editorial Late last week we ran a story on how the Google Chrome team had decided to use Gtk+ as the graphical toolkit for the Linux version of the Chrome web browser. It was a story that caused some serious debate on a variety of aspects, but in this short editorial, I want to focus on one aspect that came forward: the longing for consistency. Several people in the thread stated they were happy with Google's choice for purely selfish reasons: they use only Gtk+ applications on their GNOME desktops. Several people chimed in to say that Qt integrates nicely in a Gtk+ environment. While that may be true from a graphical point of view, that really isn't my problem with mixing toolkits. The issue goes a lot deeper than that.
E-mail Print r 2   · Read More · 93 Comment(s)
Permalink for comment 349732
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

How about this?

While this document serves as the basis for consistency between GNOME applications, you are encouraged to look at and follow other application's conventions where this document provides no guidelines.

Most of the recommendations in the GNOME HI Guidelines are designed to help you create applications that are consistent with the GNOME environment and other GNOME applications.

So, when there is no explicit guidelines, the Consistency principle says you shall HIGify your application so that it is consistent with other GNOME applications

And how about this?

It is a bug that was opened 6+ years ago because the reporter wanted the tab bar at other location than the top. Incidentally, it was shot down immediately by none other than Havoc Pennington, the one who would then bring the holy book of "The Inmates Are Running the Asylum" to the world of GNOME (

And finally, here's a cute one from Ubuntu's Mark Shuttleworth:

tabs should appear at the top of the application window

The GNOME guys are working on adding some guidelines to the tab usage, and Mark's document is being referenced by

Reply Parent Score: 1