Consider renaming "channels" to "rooms" about cinny HOT 13 CLOSED

I knew somebody is going to raise it someday, the reasons we call them channels are,

• Channel is a widely accepted word when it comes to chat applications. Be it slack/discord/irc, all call them channels.
• Matrix community know that when people say channels, they are talking about rooms but when it comes to outside community or someone new to matrix, they don't know that rooms means channels.
• IMO why matrix named them rooms at server level is because the protocol is not just about messaging and it has wide variety of usages but when it comes to use it as messaging or chat app, client should take the responsibility and call them channels so there a consistency between chat/messaging applications and it's less confusing to users.

from cinny.

if there is concern about new user experience for people coming over from Discord etc, then perhaps the actual solution should be a first-time-experience walkthrough, e.g. a popover showing the "room list" (rooms are comparable to channels on slack or discord), here is the user list (click this button to hide it at any time) etc.

from cinny.

I think discussion has run long enough (~ 1 month) and there's a clear consensus that people want room over channel, so we have thought of doing this in upcomming release.

Also as project will grow, it will be hell of task to do this later, so better do it now than few months after.

from cinny.

If element does a mistake, does that means that every client has to follow that?

from cinny.

I think that consistency within the ecosystem is more important than consistency compared to other apps, because this app first and foremost is a matrix client and so therefore should use matrix terminology for it's various concepts. if user A is on Cinny, and user B is on Element, discussing what's happening in another matrix room should be simple for them to do, rather than including confusion because one person calls them rooms and the other person calls them channels.

that being said, if a user is communicating with bridged users on, for example, slack, there is already going to be a certain level of confusion because of the difference in terminology. that is less likely to be a case that would sneak up on users, however, as most people will likely know when they are in a scenario that includes talking to bridged users from another platform (you don't usually do so accidentally, but after rather a lot of setup and configuration).

also, the use of the term rooms is nearly as old as the use of the term channels: irc predates the term with "channels", but "chat rooms" have been around since at least the early 1990s.

the choice for the term "rooms" also does not necessarily tie directly to the use for matrix protocol to be used for more things but chat... it's actually a significant differentiator in the underlying architecture. a "channel" on irc, slack, discord, etc. is inherently a child object of a specific irc network, slack workspace, or discord server/guild because these are centralized technologies. matrix is a decentralized technology, and a room exists outside of the context of a specific homeserver. a room exists on all homeservers that have participating members, and administrative roles are not defined by a server but by the room itself. this inherently different functionality deserves a differentiating identifier.

from cinny.

Personally, I like the fact that rooms are called "channels" in Cinny, since, like you mentioned, it'll be easier for Discord users to migrate to Matrix.

But I also understand the importance of consistency across the entire Matrix platform.

What about an option to toggle whether "channels" are named "rooms"? (Of course, the new dilemma would be in deciding which naming style to default to).

Also, I'm behind that tooltip idea 100%.

from cinny.

Matrix community know that when people say channels

the current technical-heavy matrix community does, but as many more kinds of users join the network, and it becomes friendlier and friendlier to manage and work with, many users won’t even bother thinking about what they’re using, and so little discrepancies become more and more “annoying” as users come from more non-technical backgrounds

client should take the responsibility and call them channels so there a consistency between chat/messaging applications and it's less confusing to users.

tell that to Element, who are setting the bar and standard for matrix clients atm.

from cinny.

I don't know if there's a notion of "mistake" here, channels != rooms, they named it rooms mainly because element is an ambassador to matrix itself, in many aspects, so it has to be the least confusing of them all.

from cinny.

Personally, I like the fact that rooms are called "channels" in Cinny, since, like you mentioned, it'll be easier for Discord users to migrate to Matrix.

Discord isn't Matrix. People calling chatrooms "rooms" instead of "channels" shouldn't be too hard for the average user to adapt to, and it avoids possible confusion with other chat platforms (also little changes like this run the risk of people thinking of Cinny as a platform just like many people used to think of Riot as a platform (rather than just a client to access a decentralized network) before Element overhauled their marketing).

Edit: If rooms are going to be called channels, why not call rooms "servers?" Similar situation.

from cinny.

if there is concern about new user experience for people coming over from Discord etc, then perhaps the actual solution should be a first-time-experience walkthrough, e.g. a popover showing the "room list" (rooms are comparable to channels on slack or discord), here is the user list (click this button to hide it at any time) etc.

There needs to be a way for advanced/returning users to disable this if this is indeed implemented.
Edit: possible usecase- someone who clears browser cache often or browses in incognito/private mode 100% of the time.

from cinny.

Discord has a "walkthrough" for every user when first logging in, but you can immediately dismiss that by one click of a prompt.

from cinny.

yes, a walkthrough for first-time users should be dismissable, agreed. and it should not happen for the same user multiple times unless they want to go back to the walkthrough again, e.g. there should be a button in settings that says "start first-time user guide" so they can get back to it if they dismissed it on accident or want a refresher.

something similar should be available if there are new features though... but that's getting way off topic.

from cinny.

This is live at https://dev.cinny.in/ Please check it out. (Hope everything works fine.) :P

from cinny.