New Terminology: A Proposal

[Alex2539]

As terminology goes, the Rainmeter community is very divided. There is no single way to refer to any individual concept. Have you ever been told to open a "skin" from the "Configs" menu? Occasions like this can lead to a great amount of confusion. A couple of us got to talking in IRC and we propose the following new terminolgy to be used universally by the community. While some adjustments may need to be made, we believe that the use of these terms will pay off in the long run.

Glossary:

• Skin - DEPRECATED
• Theme - DEPRECATED
• Applet - Any individual .ini file that can be run by Rainmeter. Any "Configuration" or "Suite" is comprised of one or more individual applets, each running independantly of one another.
• Variant - Any one of multiple applets within the same folder. These are typically aesthetic alterations.
• Config. - ALTERED - Short for "Configuration". Refers to a set of applets all meant to run at once, their positions, their settings (ie: transparency, "click through", etc.), as well if the wallpaper if the user so chooses. Used by "RainThemes" (RainConfigs now?). Identical to what were "themes".
• Suite - Any collection of applets that are distributed together and meant to be used in conjuntion with one another. Such terminology need only apply at the creator's discretion. "Theme" may also be an acceptable word but should be avoided to eschew obfuscation.

As you can see, "Skin" and "Theme" have been removed from the lexicon. "Skin" would often be confused for "config" and vice versa. Theme has been merged with "Config" as they are really much the same thing. There's a poll up there, so vote. Yea or Nay?

[sgtevmckay]

I will reserve my opinion at this time for 2 reasons.

1.) I am exhausted as all get out (so excuse the rambling)!
2.) I want to serious consider this with a clear mind.

I see all the advantages. As we are also in need to impress that Rainmeter is an advanced software, and not all aspects are going to be user friendly.
A couple of additions, that can be instituted by skin builders, has been implemented that can make individual Configs/Variants (Evidence in Enigma's new information entry format), as well as the app version checker.
Ultimately I immediately like this concept, as it will reflect that Rainmeter is not a skinning tool, but a skinnable tool.
Moving away from common words such as skin(s) could assist in this, but the terms proposed are still acceptable enough to be properly translated.
Draw back: you are going to have old timers, like myself, that will have vernacular issues moving forward, and there will be folks coming forward that are used to other software that utilize common terminology.
Eliminating words such as "skin" and "theme" (almost too common and "Type Cast") will place Rainmeter on a higher pedestal with out making it appear out of reach of everyday folks like you and I.
As has also been discussed in great length in the forum is the commonalization and move towards overly being too user friendly. Ultimately Rainmeter is not designed to be user friendly, and I fear where this continuing trend may take Rainmeter.
There are one or two more things I would have added as capabilities to Rainmeter in the way of user friendly, but ultimately Rainmeter is not meant to be user friendly in the tool development (Applet) phase.
I have seen several other programs similar to Rainmeter choke on the user friendly connotation, to the point where another major Rainmeter competitor is now become a sinking ship.
Essentially they have User Friendlied themselves to death, and have restricted the constructive development to within limitations that do not exist in their program, but the End User was herded into using.


Again it is a matter of education, demonstration, and Application.

I like this recommendation as it will assist in breaching the gap between common skinning programs (that Rainmeter is not) and advanced Software utilization/development (which Rainmeter can be)

But let me sleep on this recommendation so that I may all aspects of this shiny, if not so new) concept

[jsmorley]

I will reserve my opinion at this time for 2 reasons.

1.) I am exhausted as all get out (so excuse the rambling)!
2.) I want to serious consider this with a clear mind.

I see all the advantages. As we are also in need to impress that Rainmeter is an advanced software, and not all aspects are going to be user friendly.
A couple of additions, that can be instituted by skin builders, has been implemented that can make individual Configs/Variants (Evidence in Enigma's new information entry format), as well as the app version checker.
Ultimately I immediately like this concept, as it will reflect that Rainmeter is not a skinning tool, but a skinnable tool.
Moving away from common words such as skin(s) could assist in this, but the terms proposed are still acceptable enough to be properly translated.
Draw back: you are going to have old timers, like myself, that will have vernacular issues moving forward, and there will be folks coming forward that are used to other software that utilize common terminology.
Eliminating words such as "skin" and "theme" (almost too common and "Type Cast") will place Rainmeter on a higher pedestal with out making it appear out of reach of everyday folks like you and I.
As has also been discussed in great length in the forum is the commonalization and move towards overly being too user friendly. Ultimately Rainmeter is not designed to be user friendly, and I fear where this continuing trend may take Rainmeter.
There are one or two more things I would have added as capabilities to Rainmeter in the way of user friendly, but ultimately Rainmeter is not meant to be user friendly in the tool development (Applet) phase.
I have seen several other programs similar to Rainmeter choke on the user friendly connotation, to the point where another major Rainmeter competitor is now become a sinking ship.
Essentially they have User Friendlied themselves to death, and have restricted the constructive development to within limitations that do not exist in their program, but the End User was herded into using.


Again it is a matter of education, demonstration, and Application.

I like this recommendation as it will assist in breaching the gap between common skinning programs (that Rainmeter is not) and advanced Software utilization/development (which Rainmeter can be)

But let me sleep on this recommendation so that I may all aspects of this shiny, if not so new) concept

Here, here Sarge... I agree 100%. There are things we can do at some levels to help with organization and helping "users" get skins from "authors" running on their systems with a minimum of knowledge. That is as far as I would ever want to see it go. If you want to "edit" a skin to change the way it looks or works, if you want to "create" a skin, you are going to be in a text editor and learning the way .ini files are put together and how it all works. Period.

[RetardedRaven]

Hmm.. Adding some two cents here in idea for a name change.

Basically the Hierarchy breaks down to this.

Rainmeter Program

Config-What is currently on the screen. Enigma Reader/Simplicity Taskbar/10 Ft Hud Clock

Theme/Skin/Suite-The specific branch of where those readers/taskbars/clock come from. Enigma/HUD Vision/Simplicity

Variants-The branch within the above that contains the various ini's. SystemM.ini/SystemL.ini/System.ini

Applet-Helper programs. Raintheme/Raintip/Rainkill

Widget-The individual ini file that you see AtomReader.ini/Clock.ini

Now while this does shake up how things are seen by old and new the reasoning behind these are (at least I believe so valid)

Now this isn't far off from what Alex has, essentially config is the same. As for theme/skin/suite while suite is a valid term and it works you run into a single problem as SGT points out. First off this nomenclature would have to be spread far and wide and to a degree enforced.

The process of how how do I configure Rainmeter can be thought of as such, for example you use pieces from the Enigma Suite, some elements from the Hud Vision Theme, and the nice clock from the Arcs Skin on your screen.
Now i did that because as you can see they are interchangeable. Meaning one of two things. 1. It will be interchanged. 2. It's not going to be easy to stop 1. While yes you can enforce the naming on people in forums/Irc who read posts/talks on naming conventions before modding rather than how do I do X.
And I'm sure if you edit the manual ,and make sure that no one ever messes up naming convention when explaining rainmeter to people you can for the most part change the lingo but to a degree it won't help. Unfortunately Rainmeter is nice but it's not the only island in the sea. Take for example I go to Winamp.com and download a skin to change the way everything works. While yes they could have said theme or suite but they said skins.
So people who may now that or any other program look at rainmeter and go where did you get that? Oh it's the Enigma skin. While sure they could say theme or suite they won't. The words are too interchangeable and therefore it's better to have them as sort of this catch-all. Like maybe i want to call mine a theme or suite or skin and forcing a naming convention on me is just not going to work. At least in this category where the words are all too commonplace and mix and match.

Variants is just a no brainer the only problem being if you have variants you have to call them as such in your skin/theme/suite.

Applet i get what you're saying about this but I've always considered an applet to be small little programs that do a small number of specific tasks, much like rainthemes,rainconfig etc.

Widgets. This again is the lone island theory. Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft itself all call the little things that you can throw on to there sidebar widgets. And for all intensive purposes thats what these little ini's are. They're the little widgets that you string together to build your config and if you work try you can customize you're own set of these to brand and give to the world. (That and calling each little thing an applet just doesn't jive well with me for some reason, possibly because widgets is just a nice word)

Essentially these changes define what you do in rainmeter.
To config is to take skin/theme/suite and assemble them at you wish producing you're own unique configuration even using the same pieces as others.
To skin/customize is to take a widget and modify it to what you desire.

What this would end up changing within the Rainmeter as it is now is a few things.
1. Rainthemes would be changed to Config
2. Configs in the menu would be changed to something Interfaces/Skins/Themes/Suites not sold on a word there and quite possibly we could choose one to slowly "bleed in" to having things shift to a certain term though theme/skin/suite would still understood even if this says different.
3. If in the menu it contains more than one ini than the term variants would be placed at the top. (Or you have the main one in a folder and have a folder called variants that contains the variations.) the menu change (could) be difficult to do and would only be a welcome addition to make the program more understandable.

[Alex2539]

Applet-Helper programs. Raintheme/Raintip/Rainkill

Widget-The individual ini file that you see AtomReader.ini/Clock.ini

I always thought the other programs were "Addons" (hence the folder).

Also, we talked about "widget" last night. I personally don't like the word. I've always found it to be overused and nearly synonymous with "thingy".

[sgtevmckay]

@ Retarded Raven

No egg and the chicken here, as I said, it is a matter of that Rainmeter is not skinning tool, but a tool that is skinnable and usable (at this time) on Windows.

@ everyone

Therefore giving certain naming conventions is not uncalled for, and can help remake Rainmeter into the tool it should be viewed as. Rainmeter is not an Objectdock, but it can do it. Rainmeter is not a desktop shell replacement, but it may get there. Rainmeter is not an off shoot of SpeedFan, but it can use it.
Rainmeter is the tool! It is up to us, the individual, on how that tool is used, and with every tool the uses and configurations must be described so that the person who uses the tool has a common language and knowledge of use, and will know where that tool can be manipulate to other uses, and the tools current possible limitations
Rainmeter is the tool!
Sure there are those folks that will continue to call certain areas skins, customizations, schema, etc, but this will also allow us (the members here) to help build up Rainmeter, in as much as identification.
Even just building a "skin" is a pain in the butt, and when I go to speak to members here, or at the IRC, I get stuff screwed up all the time, and part of this is the fact that there is no solid documentation to identify one part from any other.
Every aspect of Rainmeter, if it is an operation that commits or an operation or build to be committed should be properly documented into a language that can be documented and properly identified.

while we are at this proper naming schema, documentation should be made for the information in the ini files.
Another one of my screw ups in communication. I can get a skin to work, but be damned if some said check your measure, would I know exactly where to look

The language to which we will label everything is a good idea, and the labeling must be clear.
the clarity must be immediately documented to the Rainwiki
And that clarification in the Rainwiki must be clearly identified, by visuals if needed.

All this being said: Understand with any tool, it can be called what ever the public wants once it has left the store. It is like changing the name of a hammer to a "Nail Whacker", ultimately it is still a hammer, but while in the store, you had better be asking for a hammer, or expect a weird look :P
Also when in the store, in some cases, you had better know what type of hammer you want, or you may get a hammer you do not need or do not want. :ugeek:

I am reserving my vote as I am awaiting to see a naming schema that totally agrees with Rainmeter, and in it's current structure. We do not want to make a lot of work here, and Rainy started a certain schema at some point. I think we need to expand, clarify and document this and then we can move forward clearer in our purpose and assistance and with Rainmeter at large.
I think Rainy was on to something when he labeled "Configs", let's take that thought to the next level and clean up our definitions.
Rainmeter is different, let's keep it that way, but again with an atmosphere that it is not outside anyone's use

I see no confusion in the labeling system proposed, but I would like to see an expansion :ugeek:
Especially as this is already being discussed in teh essence of our current conversation

Also need to figure out how to rename the forum appropriately, so a little assistance in this area would be greatfully appreciated as well. This assumes that we agree and move forward with the a labeling scheme

[sgtevmckay]

Wish I had a hot label to added, but gave this thread a star and a sticky status till further notice

[jsmorley]

I have spent the last few hours chewing on this whole thing and have finally cast my vote. I voted no. Here is why.

I am not opposed to simplification and clarification of the terms we use for things. That is a good thing. However, I look at this from a "cost benefit" standpoint, and I can't convince myself. I think that unless we want to put the C++ (primarily Rainy only at this point) resources into this effort, we can only cause far, far more confusion than we alleviate. the folder in My Documents is called \Skins. The context menu refers to "skins" and "configs" in several locations. The actual Rainmeter code is just absolutely run through with references to skins and configs, both purely descriptive and also functional. Rainy has created variables like #SKINPATH# and we have had 100,000 downloads and installations of 1.0 using these paths and names. Same in a much lesser way with "themes". Aside from the actual application, there is the references on the context menu and the fact that the physical file structure is called \Themes.

So the "cost" side of the equation is pretty obvious. Tons of code work, terrible confusion until that is accomplished IN FULL, hundreds if not thousands of users who will be expected to rename folders AND edit skins to match the new scheme or have anything written to use the new conventions useless to them. Changes to the installation program. Changes to probably hundreds of places in the Wiki, the online and in-program help, and in the forums where we have built up a lot of "tips and tricks" and answers to "help" questions that now may just cause confusion.

How about the "benefit" side. We eliminate some confusion between "skins" and "configs" today. That's about it as far as I can see. Nothing that we want to create using a naming scheme of "applets/configs/suites" couldn't be done just as easily using "skins/configs/suites" while leaving "themes" as a separate entity handled by RainThemes. Themes are purely "logical" in a sense in any case, while skins and configs and suites are tied to a physical file structure.

The way Rainmeter's context menu deals with the difference between "skin" and "config" may not be perfect, but actually it makes sense if you don't get hung up on a name you don't like. A skin is one .ini file. A config is the folder that contains a grouping of subfolders with .ini files. I'm not just making that up or reading anyone's mind, look at the context menu. That is what it means. It can be assumed that the skin maker or the user meant this to create a logical grouping, but the program makes no such assumption. It's just a folder path. Not to harp on RainThemes, but while we might think that a "theme" is the same as a "config", Rainmeter doesn't. The context menu for Rainmeter defines "config" as being in one folder tree. One of RainThemes primary purposes is pretty much specifically the opposite of that. I could care less about changing RainThemes to RainConfigs, it's 15 minutes work and I have no ego wrapped up in the term "themes". But a "theme" today is not a "config" today. Not at all. As far as calling the lowest level a "skin" or an "applet", it makes not the slightest "real" difference. It's just that skin isn't the perfect name. Neither is applet in my view. Point is, it really doesn't matter in any practical sense.

So my vote is to put our resources into the functional changes we would like to see in Rainmeter, short and long term. The issue of using [Measures] as input to parameters like X=[MeasureName] or Formula=10*[MeasureName]. More capabilities in integration with the web, a real look at what can be done to increase the graphics tools available, Work to allow more functionality in terms of enhancing or replacing the Start Menu and Taskbar. A "temperature" monitor which doesn't require Speedfan. A plugin for "Spotify". These are all things I have seen or heard as "wishes" for Rainmeter. Let's spend our very limited resources on them.

I know I am the skunk at the picnic, and I am well aware I am just one voice. I just think we have bigger fish to fry and encourage all to give that some consideration.

[Inarai]

JSM, forgive me. I'm not familiar with how the core coding's done here, but... It seems to me that at very least you should be able to copy it into any text editor in the world and do a simple find-replace all, no? I would think that going line by line would be so much unneeded hassle when there's an easy(not merely easier, but easy) way to do it.

[Falconer]

Very interesting discussion... I have not voted yet, but will after thinking about this a bit... it is early in the morning and I'm not totally awake...

Primarily, my opinion is that straightening out some terminology, perhaps with an official glossary of common terms on the RainWiki, is an excellent idea. But on first look, I definitely do not agree with many of the more specific ideas posted. As mentioned by Alex, "Widget" has come to mean "thingagummy" and is somewhat overused. Sure, "skin" isn't a very accurate term, but it works... at the moment I have no better solution so that is as far as I'll go on that tangent.

One thing I won't flinch on is the difference between "config" and "theme," as JSM so wonderfully explained. Theme is very different from config, but currently some people use them interchangeably. This interchangeability ought to be corrected without having to eliminate one of the terms.

Further, I don't see the need for any rigid enforcement or rapid overhaul of Rainmeter's UI and Manual just to make old terms fit with some new ones. Rather, wouldn't it be better to clarify the definition and appropriate usage of the terms we already have? If so, only a few minor changes might be necessary...

[Apologies in advance for any gross grammatical errors above. I'm a little drowsy and I didn't proofread. ]