Generally speaking, for individual tools we want descriptive names. Here is how the "Highlighter" tool is used and the associated terms around it:
The tool that lets you visually select an element on that page for use by "element-centric" tools (such as the Style Inspector) is called the Highlighter. It has a menu item on the Mac at Tools->Web Developer->Highlighter and on Windows at Firefox->Web Developer->Highlighter. You can also get to it via a "Highlight Element" context menu item.
The Highlighter has two modes:
* Highlight mode – as you move the mouse around, the highlight follows until you click a page element
* Selected mode – an element is selected and you can freely move the mouse around without changing the selection
The Highlighter Toolbar has a button, labeled "Highlight" that switches between the Highlight and Selected modes.
The other developer tools out there don't have a distinct tool like the Highlighter, instead bundling what the Highlighter does into the single "developer tools" interface. However, the concept of "element highlighting" appeared recently in a Chromium-related blog post[1] so it would seem that the naming is reasonable for what the Highlighter does.
Does anyone see trouble with this naming? (And what is the proper group to email to get l10n feedback to see if there's a problem with translation?)
Kevin
[1]: http://peter.sh/2011/08/fullscreen-api-enhanced-element-highlighting-and-progress-on-flexbox/
--
Kevin Dangoor
product manager, developer tools
work: http://mozilla.com/
blog: http://blueskyonmars.com/
@dangoor
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
Reasons to call it Highlighter rather than Inspector:
1. too many "inspectors" (style inspector, object inspector, Web Inspector)
2. the Highlighter visually highlights the element
3. conveniently, a "Highlight Element" context menu item doesn't conflict with Firebug's "Inspect Element" (though I'm sure we could come up with other solutions for that as well)
We could reasonably call it the "Page Inspector" to clarify point 1. Personally, I like Highlighter better as I think the name fits the visual presentation better.
Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
--
However, our tool is a bit more sophisticated (now) than the point-and-click
inspectors in other plugins/browsers. We're actually doing the visual
highlighting using the grayed out boxes, and we're (I think still) gonna be
adding heads-up overlay information like visually annotating dimensions and
other important meta-data about the element, etc.
When you take all of that new functionality into account, it's a bit more
than your standard run-of-the-mill "Inspector". I'm not sure "Highlighter"
conveys quite the right tone either, but at least it's a decent name that
distinguishes, and it's easy to explain why, because we added all this other
useful stuff to the flow.
Other off-the-cuff suggestions: "Examiner", "Analyzer", "Reviewer",
"Selector", "Describer", "Annotator", "Visualizer".... and to be really
crazy: "Explorer"... ha!
Yeah, I know, most of those are worse. Maybe "Highlighter" is just the least
bad of the options. But I do like that we're giving it a different name
because it does a lot more stuff.
--Kyle
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Mike Ratcliffe" <mratc...@mozilla.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 9:54 AM
> To: <dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org>
> Subject: Re: "Highlighter" tool name
>
>> The name of the tool is the highlighter and the verb is Inspect.
>> Personally, I prefer Inspector, but I guess it was previously changed for
>> a reason.
>>
True, it does that, but highlighting is just a means to a different end
here.
> 3. conveniently, a "Highlight Element" context menu item doesn't conflict with Firebug's "Inspect Element" (though I'm sure we could come up with other solutions for that as well)
This is really strange. How is the user supposed to understand the
difference between these two menu items? Firebug should just say
"Inspect Element with Firebug" here or hide the built-in "Inspect
Element" item, since it does the same and the user made an informed
decision to install Firebug.
"Highlighter" doesn't advertise "heads-up overlay information like
visually annotating dimensions and other important meta-data about the
element". This all sounds like inspecting to me.
I think you also should ask the L10n group so we have a name that is
localizable enough to make sense.
Avoiding a name conflict with the still-unmatched DOM Inspector add-on
(at least unmatched for my purposes which mostly are inspecting chrome
style application for theme work and JS properties of nodes for
app/add-on dev work) is also something I like, though. ;-)
Robert Kaiser
--
Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never
meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible
arguments that we as a community should think about. And most of the
time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :)
A tool should be named for WHAT it does , not its application.
A screwdriver is still a screwdriver even if used to dig a hole or pry
something loose.
Namaste', Art
This is a straw man ... The "highlighter"/inspector does more than
highlighting nodes.
This is true, but the main thing the Highlighter does is highlight the selected page elements that will be used by other, element-centric tools (like the Style Inspector which provides the detailed CSS information for an element).
What we're building is more of a set of tools that can be used in different contexts rather than a large mass of "tool". There is no one "inspector" because there are many possible things to inspect on a page (CSS styles, object properties, the DOM, network requests).
I say this to explain some of the rationale behind the name, not to further the bikeshedding. There will always be people who are unhappy with a choice of names (or bikeshed color choice).
I'll try one of the l10n groups to get that sort of feedback.
Kevin
I wonder what other element-specific tools you have in mind. Anyway,
"Inspect Element" doesn't seem to tie you to a specific element-specific
tool. The gray overlay is really a presentational detail.
Most "Inspectors" raise an interface that carries some representation of the thing you're looking at along with a little box around the node that's selected. We're approaching node inspection from the other way, we "highlight" the node (same terminology), but only give a superficial representation of that object. We then access other tools to further describe and tweak it (HTML panel, Style Inspector, Object Inspectors, Scratchpads...).
So the tool we're opening really is just a highlighter that can call out to other components. Maybe this is too fine a distinction for a name though.
I suggest: "Minotaur"!
~ rob :)
On 2011-09-01, at 11:38 , Kevin Dangoor wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Dao wrote:
>
> This is true, but the main thing the Highlighter does is highlight the selected page elements that will be used by other, element-centric tools (like the Style Inspector which provides the detailed CSS information for an element).
>
> What we're building is more of a set of tools that can be used in different contexts rather than a large mass of "tool". There is no one "inspector" because there are many possible things to inspect on a page (CSS styles, object properties, the DOM, network requests).
>
> I say this to explain some of the rationale behind the name, not to further the bikeshedding. There will always be people who are unhappy with a choice of names (or bikeshed color choice).
>
> I'll try one of the l10n groups to get that sort of feedback.
>
> Kevin
>
Exactly. And to carry the screwdriver analogy further, once you have the
screwdriver in place you can turn it, pry with it, jab it, etc. The name
"highlighter" is even better as it is unambiguously self-descriptive for
what the tool does.
Art
>On 2011-09-01, at 11:38 , Kevin Dangoor wrote:
> > On Aug 30, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Dao wrote: