Rockbox Technical Forums

Support and General Use => User Interface and Voice => Topic started by: aliask on August 16, 2006, 04:11:52 AM

Title: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 16, 2006, 04:11:52 AM
After using rockbox for a while I've finally decided that the menu system needs a bit of a rework - the settings in particular.
I remember one of the hardest things about switching to rockbox was the way the menu was laid out, I could never remember where things were, but I got used to it gradually.

The main thing I want to change is to get all the settings under a general "Settings" menu item, so you don't have 3 or 4 items in the main menu relating to settings.
Midkay expressed his wish to keep "Sound Settings" in the top level of the menu, which I'm happy to keep, but I'd like feedback as to what people thing should change, before I start working on the code.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: LinusN on August 16, 2006, 04:14:55 AM
If I enable my crystal ball, here's a summary of the suggestions you will get:

"I want my favourite options on top, and easily accessible via the Rec button"

 ;)
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 16, 2006, 04:32:09 AM
I've created a wiki page with a rough first shot - it's still very much open to changes, please contribute.

http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/MenuRework
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: keuleJ on August 16, 2006, 05:02:55 AM
Hey I'm glad someone spends a few thoughts on the usability of rockbox!
I personally wouldn't like to have the bookmarks on the first menu item as i never use them.

And some more thoughts on the menu logic. Why are the recording screen and the fm radio menu items while the wps isn't? This doesn't seem logical to me. For me these three screens (wps, recording and radio) should somehow be treated similarily.

That's just my 2ct.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 16, 2006, 05:38:51 AM
This gets shot down every time (well, the one time) I brought it up, but I'm going to say it again.

We need customizable menus, or a customizable area where we can put our favorite menu options.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 16, 2006, 06:23:08 AM
The main thing I want to change is to get all the settings under a general "Settings" menu item, so you don't have 3 or 4 items in the main menu relating to settings.
Or should we say, "General Settings"?

Quote
Midkay expressed his wish to keep "Sound Settings" in the top level of the menu, which I'm happy to keep, but I'd like feedback as to what people thing should change, before I start working on the code.
Soooooo, the Main Menu would have a "Sound Settings" and a separate "General Settings" menu?  There's something that sounds very familiar about that.

OK, all kidding aside, I understand what you are getting at.

Can I strongly suggest that you review (and add to, if you feel it appropriate) this existing wiki page (http://http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/MenuLayoutDiscussion) rather than putting a similar discussion on a separate page?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 16, 2006, 06:53:22 AM
What do you mean Febs? That's the page I created, the one you linked. I'm calling for input on it, so if you think it needs revising, feel free to edit as you see fit.

Ideally, I would like to have the Sound Settings in the Settings menu, but if everyone likes it the way it is, who am I to complain?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 16, 2006, 06:56:58 AM
Grrrrr.  Sorry, cut and paste error.  (More like user-hasn't-had-enough-coffee error ;) ).

This is the page that I meant to link to:  http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/MenuLayoutDiscussion

I'll correct the above link.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 16, 2006, 07:22:50 AM
That page is great - I'll update the page I made to just link there and encourage input :)
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: ego on August 16, 2006, 08:24:07 AM
i'd like crossfade (and probably replaygain) in the sound menu. seems to me they effect the sound, i never really understood why they were under general
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 16, 2006, 08:25:38 AM
I could see putting replaygain under sound settings, but  IMO, crossfade is clearly a playback option.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: ego on August 16, 2006, 08:33:53 AM
well.... yeah, i guess it should be with shuffle and repeat.

but that gets me thinkin, should playback mode really be in a different place from volume? i know they made the quick menu for easy access, but the QM would be less important if the more commonly used options were in one place. maybe a deeper re-organization makes sense - i'd imagine most people set the balance, channels, and stereo width one and forget about 'em, and (this one's more open to debate) i pretty rarely change my EQ, just switching between off for line out and one setting for my headphones. on the other hand, shuffle, repeat, crossfade, and auto change directory i might use more frequently.

is something like that within the scope of what we're talking about, a scrapping of the current subheadings to make things more practical?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Mikerman on August 16, 2006, 10:06:13 AM
Hey I'm glad someone spends a few thoughts on the usability of rockbox!
I personally wouldn't like to have the bookmarks on the first menu item as i never use them.
I can understand your thoughts.  I use bookmarks and like having them readily accessible, as I'm sure others do ...
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: fml2 on August 16, 2006, 10:24:57 AM
IMHO 'Crossfeed' belongs to sound settings (=what to do with the sound). Whereas 'Crossfade' is rightfully placed in the Playback settings (=what to play).
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: ego on August 16, 2006, 11:29:59 AM
IMHO 'Crossfeed' belongs to sound settings (=what to do with the sound). Whereas 'Crossfade' is rightfully placed in the Playback settings (=what to play).

any thoughts on my suggestion that 'sound settings' and 'playback settings' might not be the best way to organize a menu system? that there may be another way, that would group more commonly used settings away from less commonly used settings? something like

Basic-
  Volume
  Shuffle
  Repeat 
  Bass
  Treble
  EQ
  Crossfade
    Crossfade Duration
  Replaygain
  Crossfeed
 
Advanced
  Balance
  Channels
  Stereo Width
  Play Selected First
  Resume on Startup
  FF/RW steps
  Fade on stop/pause
  Auto Change Directory

Anti-Skip and Beep Volume may or may not be better suited to system settings, Optical Recording should be a recording option, and ID3 tag priority should be a display option.

i know if the menus were organized in this way, i would rarely if ever go into the advanced menu once the settings were set up the first time. if other people agree, this or something similar might be worth considering.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: mightybrick on August 16, 2006, 12:54:28 PM
any thoughts on my suggestion that 'sound settings' and 'playback settings' might not be the best way to organize a menu system? that there may be another way, that would group more commonly used settings away from less commonly used settings? something like

Basic-
  Volume
  Shuffle
  Repeat 
  Bass
  Treble
  EQ
  Crossfade
    Crossfade Duration
  Replaygain
  Crossfeed
 
Advanced
  Balance
  Channels
  Stereo Width
  Play Selected First
  Resume on Startup
  FF/RW steps
  Fade on stop/pause
  Auto Change Directory

Anti-Skip and Beep Volume may or may not be better suited to system settings, Optical Recording should be a recording option, and ID3 tag priority should be a display option.

i know if the menus were organized in this way, i would rarely if ever go into the advanced menu once the settings were set up the first time. if other people agree, this or something similar might be worth considering.
I think this sounds reasonable.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Rincewind on August 16, 2006, 01:31:39 PM
basic and advanced is a bad idea imho, because it is not objectivly clear what is "advanced" and you would need to remember if you want to set a basic or an advanced setting everytime you want to set an option.

I would like to see the levels how far you have to go inside the menus reduced. that would mean to put more options in the menu root. I use sound settings and playback settings the most, so I think it could be worth discussing about putting playback settings in the root. Personally, playlist settings could go inside general settings. I actually go inside general settings very often to set some playlist stuff and have to remember that these settings aren't there...

Some other minor suggestions I like to repeat here:
- Sleep timer in menu root (it is not actually a "setting", rather a function, so it shouldn't be buried inside general settings -> system)
- "Show recent bookmarks" should only be visibile if you have the setting "keep a list of recent bookmarks" enabled, because otherwise it is completely useless (and on first position!)

Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 16, 2006, 06:33:50 PM
Why is sound (The only option on that menu that you never ever ever need to go into, as it's easier and more logical to do it from the WPS) the first option on the sound menu?  Is the iPod (the only DAP I've used) the only target that allows you to change the volume from the WPS?  If not, shouldn't volume be the LAST option on the menu, and something a bit more likely to be chosen get the first spot?

The first spot should be where the single most used feature goes.  That way, it's the easiest to get to.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 17, 2006, 12:47:18 AM
I completely agree with Rincewind, on all counts.

@Yotto:
Some people seem to use the Sound Settings menu a lot - and don't even want it moved from the top-level menu - so clearly it does get used by some people. The least I can do it leave it at the top so they don't whinge too much ;)

I've updated the wiki page that Febs linked. Once again, I encourage as much input as possible on the topic.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: keuleJ on August 17, 2006, 02:36:14 AM
I know I maybe repeat myself. But what do you think about a menu item where you could get to the wps?
Why are the recording screen and the fm radio menu items while the wps isn't? This doesn't seem logical to me. For me these three screens (wps, recording and radio) should somehow be treated similarily.
You can get to the menu from the file browser, too.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 17, 2006, 02:41:24 AM
Choosing to go to the recording screen or the FM radio from the menu both have functions. Displaying the WPS is pointless if music isn't already playing, and if music *is* already playing (or you want to resume playback) you just press Play in the filetree (and probably soon the same button in the menu) to resume playback and show the WPS.

If there's already a one-button solution to get to the WPS, why have a menu item as well?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 17, 2006, 02:55:10 AM
@Yotto:
Some people seem to use the Sound Settings menu a lot - and don't even want it moved from the top-level menu - so clearly it does get used by some people. The least I can do it leave it at the top so they don't whinge too much ;)

Sorry, I said "Sound" where I meant "Volume"

If there's already a one-button solution to get to the WPS, why have a menu item as well?

Well, they do it for volume... :D

However, a limited amount of redundancy isn't a bad thing, and we'd finally be able to see all those fancy "stop" graphics we've been drawing.

The ideal in my mind would be customizable menus, which were actually simple text files or a directory structure (Like Windows does it).  Have some "Administrator" menu options that you can't change, including a "Reset to defaults" for if we screw it up, but other than that, let the user do whatever he/she wants.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 17, 2006, 03:10:18 AM
In response to the Yotto regarding the volume setting:

In the case of someone wanting to make sure the volume is at a safe level before starting playback, or set volume for a plugin (Doom, Rockboy) the volume menu serves a purpose. Going to the WPS without resuming the music is, in a practical sense, useless.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 17, 2006, 03:21:02 AM
@Yotto:
While I too think that the volume setting is mostly redundant for my uses, I'm reluctant to completely remove settings unless there is a big push for it, just in case one person out there does actually use it.

I also think that customizable menus wouldn't be nice, but it would be difficult to manage. If the file gets accidentally deleted, blanked or corrupted, I can imagine people having a hard time with it.
In addition to that, coding it would be a bitch, I can't even begin to think how I'd manage it, but then again, I'm not a very experienced programmer.

I've made a patch which I've attached to the Wiki page that changes the menu's to how they are in the Wiki. Nothing like actually seeing what it's like to use.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 17, 2006, 04:12:47 AM
In response to the Yotto regarding the volume setting:

In the case of someone wanting to make sure the volume is at a safe level before starting playback, or set volume for a plugin (Doom, Rockboy) the volume menu serves a purpose. Going to the WPS without resuming the music is, in a practical sense, useless.

That is two uses for the control that I never considered.  I currently, if I'm worried about the volume, check the dB level when the WPS starts and take advantage of the scroll wheel causing playback to stop to lower the volume before I hear a thing.  It's probably a bad habit to get into, if the scrollwheel thing gets fixed I'll have a rude awakening.

But now that I can see that there /is/ a reason for it, I'll get off the "delete it" kick.  And as that use could make volume the most used option in the sound menu, I'll even get off my "move it" kick.

One last kick to get me off of :D is the "Playlist" first before "Sound", as I personally use the "Playlist" option (And the "Reshuffle within it, which is last instead of first) all the time and the "Sound" option never.  It'd be nice to just hit 'select' twice to reshuffle the playlist, or 'select', scroll to the bottom (which is actually pretty easy, at least on the ipod) and 'select' again to reshuffle isn't bad

And I'm starting to "View Current Playlist" more and more, and that's option #1 currently.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 17, 2006, 04:35:24 AM
Ah - it looks like we're actually talking about different menus! :p

The one I'm reworking is the main menu, not the onplay menu (the one you access by holding select in the WPS or on a file), although it could be argued that it needs a rework too (nowhere near as major as the main menu though).
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 17, 2006, 05:20:08 AM
I was, actually.  To be honest, I don't use the Main Menu near as much as the Onplay menu :D  Frequently, I just hit 'play' on bootup because I want to continue listening to whatever I stopped listening to the last time.  If it's not what I wanted, I head into the onplay menu or the file browser to make my change.
But yes, the main menu is kind of a mess.  :D
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 17, 2006, 06:42:01 AM
I think that we should try to use the correct menu names to keep this discussion from getting too confusing.  The "onplay" menu is the File Context Menu or the WPS Context Menu, depending on the context in which you are using it.

I wholeheartedly agree with the suggestion that "Playlists" should be high up, and probably first, in the Main Menu, considering how integral playlists are to Rockbox's operation.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 17, 2006, 07:19:26 AM
Sorry, it's just habit because that's what it's called in the source code, and I've never heard it referred to outside of there. WPS Context menu it is!

As for moving Playlist - seems logical to me, I'll update the wiki page
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: ryran on August 17, 2006, 09:00:10 AM
Quote
Sleep timer in menu root (it is not actually a "setting", rather a function, so it shouldn't be buried inside general settings -> system)
Awesome. Whole-heartedly agree.

Also, I third the moving up of playlist in the context menu. I would absolutely love that.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: fml2 on August 17, 2006, 09:02:57 AM
... For me these three screens (wps, recording and radio) should somehow be treated similarily.

Exactly this is the reason why I made a patch (FS#5049) to treat that screens similarly after start up (with a side effect of reducing the number of menu entries by one). The patch isn't completed yet. Any help is appreciated.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Rincewind on August 17, 2006, 01:37:17 PM
how about putting "view current playlist" in the root of the main menu?
My argument for this goes like this: View current playlist is an important screen (if we agree that rockbox is a playlist based player) and should be nearly as easily accessible as the file browser.

On many units there are no buttons left, so I think it deserves a prominent place in the main menu and the wps and browser context menus  (I know it is there, but not at top level).

On the irivers I suggest using a short press of record button to view the current playlist and long press of rec for recording screen.

A general thing: the menus are not in an organized order right now, entries were added at the bottom or inserted when new functions came. I would suggest to order entries with the priority that most used features should come first. Maybe a few polls on controversial priorities. Most things should be clear, for instance, in general settings -> system, battery comes first but you only use this if you happen to change your battery, roughly once a year if ever.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 17, 2006, 01:38:48 PM
I wonder if it wouldn't be more useable if it menus were in alphabetical order.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: bascule on August 17, 2006, 01:50:49 PM
I wonder if it wouldn't be more useable if it menus were in alphabetical order.
More consistent, but surely not more usable.

In concordance with other views expressed here, most-used functions should be at the top of their respective menus. In particular, I would like to get to View Current Playlist even quicker than I currently can...

I know it would be difficult to support and potentially hazardous for the 'WTF!!1! i changed the menus and now i cant use my ipod rockbox is crap' user, but I really like the idea of a config file for menus so I could design my own. I already re-wrote the tagnavi.config to suit myself and I'm really happy with it.

It seems to me that, with a suitable key combination to restore menus to a default, that it would give the best of bothe worlds - those that fiddle, can; those that like it simple, leave it alone...
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Rincewind on August 17, 2006, 01:52:29 PM
I wonder if it wouldn't be more useable if it menus were in alphabetical order.

I disagree, a similar idea would be to have short entries first so that the screen looks nice...
alphabetical is only a superficial order which doesn't make sense to me if we only have about 10 menu entries in each menu.
in a .cfg file alphabetical order seems logial to me, because there are all entries at one level.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 17, 2006, 02:59:04 PM
I think that a short press of the Record key should go to the record screen. The short-press of a button is it's "Primary" function, and the record button is the Record button, so it only makes sense. People already complain about the button mappings being counterintuitive without a button with so clear of a purpose being retasked.

This would still leave long-press open for an alternative function such as view current playlist.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 17, 2006, 03:17:20 PM
I wonder if it wouldn't be more useable if it menus were in alphabetical order.

I disagree, a similar idea would be to have short entries first so that the screen looks nice...
I don't think that it's quite the same thing, considering that alphabetical order makes it easier to locate an item within a list. 

In theory, I think that putting most used functions first makes sense.  However, I'm not sure that we could achieve a consensus as to what constiutes a "most used function."
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 17, 2006, 03:28:44 PM
I think that we're missing a few things here:

1) Context menu. This exists for the 'most used functions in this context' which of could benefit from some small reevaluation.
2) The context menu could be enabled from the main menu. So, click the menu button, then call the context menu, and you get a smaller main-menu sorted by "Most used". This wouldn't contain everything, but it would be what people most commonly enter the menu for. This would allow for the normal menu to be alphabetized for easy finding of things.
3) Menu depth and locations. Some things are possibly miscategorized, as well it could be reconsidered as to whether the menus should go as deep as they do, or if some categories should be brought up on their own (LCD settings being a subcategory may not be the best idea.) In this case Alphabetizing will help even more for finding things, if some subcategories are floated up.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Rincewind on August 17, 2006, 03:49:02 PM
I think alphabetical order is only important for very large lists. If you can see every list entry at once on the screen, the eye sees catch phrases (for instance words with Capitals) first, you don't scan a short list with maybe 10 entries alphabetically (at least I don't).

A consensus on what settings should have priority can't be find everywhere of course, but in these cases we can just leave it like it is now. We don't want to do everything from scratch, I see it that we are suggesting improvements, not a completely new concept.

and with alphabetical order you would think "ah, its alphabetical, ok, I want to find playlist options, that begins with a P that comes somewhere after N... damn, playlist options aren't in this menu, they are somewhere else..."

It would make sense to provide a special menu, where every settable option is inside one big alphabetically orderd list so that you can find options there when you know the name but not in which menu they are in. But this is much work for such a small feature.

On the record button thing: I wouldn't want to have a button that stops playback and maybe even activates the internal mic and monitors it to my ears if I accidentally press it. A long press is safer and you don't lose much convenience (and shoot me down for this, but this is actually the use that is labelled on the back of the player)
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 17, 2006, 04:05:02 PM
I personally many times tapped the Record button expecting it to take me to the Record screen quickly only to find it changing the EQ settings on the original firmware. So, while others may agree with that, to me it's always been a bad design choice on iRiver's part.

My theory is this: If you don't want accidental keypresses to interrupt your music, put hold on. There's already two keys that can interrupt the currently playing song easily, as well as a host of combinations that can do various things to it. Turn on hold on the base unit, and use the remote, or simply turn off hold when you want to change things. One more music-stopping button does not, in my mind, significantly increase the chances of your playback experience being altered.

But again, these are just my opinions on the feature.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Mr. Brownstone on August 17, 2006, 06:50:47 PM
I think having "Bass" and "Treble" options right next to "EQ" is a bit redundant.

Indeed, there are about four ways of modifying the EQ and they all achieve the same objective.

So I guess this is a vote for a little less duplication. ;D
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Febs on August 17, 2006, 07:01:33 PM
The EQ is software based, while the  'bass' and 'treble' controls are hardware based, so these settings really control different things.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Mad Big Sausage on August 18, 2006, 07:04:00 PM
Just a quick note without any extra opinion.

What are deemed to be the most important features are at the top so it takes a few button presses to get to them.
Yes?

So the single most important option is #1 at the top, the second most important #2, the third at #3, the fouth #4 and so on till we get to the least used feature right at the bottom.

The first entry can be reached without any up/down presses, the second and last by 1 press, the third and second last by two.

Couldn't  the less used entries be located somewhere in the middle of the list?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: mnhnhyouh on August 18, 2006, 07:10:10 PM
I would chip in here to support the option to config the menu structure....

h
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Llorean on August 18, 2006, 07:12:57 PM
From my understanding there are a host of complications that could come with this regarding properly voicing and localizing a configurable menu.

I'm sure they can all be resolved, but is there really *that* much benefit to such a thing considering both the work, added complexity to rockbox (including likely increased size, very bad for the archos targets, and increased bugginess for a long time) of such a feature?
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: breizjb on August 18, 2006, 07:43:37 PM
hello everybody,

i use to post for a similar request, but i wasn't so motiveted and the menu organisation is not so bad. I just want to propose an other idea: the use of "tagnavi.config" file. In fact it could be possible to have an acces in some point of the "main menu" (maybe i am not a dev). So the "tagnavi.config" could be a kind of *.wps files that you can customise in that way:

"Artists"   artist   : album  : title = "%02d. %s" tracknum title
"Albums"    album    : title = "%02d. %s" tracknum title
"Genres"    genre    : artist : album : title = "%02d. %s" tracknum title
"Tracks"    title
"FM"  main menu : FM Radio
"Recording" main menu : Recording
"Settings" .............................

I don't know just an idea
good night
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Mikerman on August 18, 2006, 07:53:09 PM
I wonder, would it create an issue to have a single hot key that could be configured by a user, for 1 or 2 uses?  If I recall correctly, that is what the Cowon X5s have.  And it's a way to meet some expressed need without, perhaps, mucking things up too much--also, it's a way to personalize one's player to one's own needs, to a degree.

Of course, if it would muck things up or if keys/key combinations just aren't available, sod on that . . . .

Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: aliask on August 18, 2006, 08:08:48 PM
These are all good ideas, but they are getting away from what I originally set out to do - reorganise the existing menu.
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Yotto on August 18, 2006, 09:33:16 PM
Couldn't  the less used entries be located somewhere in the middle of the list?

I agree totally.  The two easiest options to get to with the ipod scrollwheel are actually the very top (no scrolling) and the very bottom (quick upscroll).  The 2nd one down, on occation, you could scroll over.  The hardest option (Like "Delete" in the file quick menu) is right in the middle.  Sadly, it's the one I use the most (other than cut, right next to it iirc).

So, for all menu items, I think the most used should be first, the 2nd most used last, the 3rd most used 2nd, etc.

Like this:

1
3
5
6
4
2
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: Rincewind on August 19, 2006, 08:57:20 AM
Couldn't  the less used entries be located somewhere in the middle of the list?

I agree, too.

I just had a thought about alpabetical sorting. It is not possible to do this, because of translations. The menu structure would be complete nonsense in a non-english language if we order the items alphabetical in english.

@breizjb: I like your idea with tagnavi.config but is very difficult to program with the current menu code. because the menu functions are spreaded about a few source files. What could be done, is to only provide access to a few menu entries, that point to screens, rather than settings and hardcode these in the code that handles tagnavi.config.
But this wouldn't give you much, because most of the screens (recording, fm) are already in the menu root.
It would be nice to be able to load special plugins this way:

"Sudoku" plugins: sudoku.rock
Title: Re: Menu reworking
Post by: AM on August 19, 2006, 05:54:03 PM
I just had a thought about alpabetical sorting. It is not possible to do this, because of translations. The menu structure would be complete nonsense in a non-english language if we order the items alphabetical in english.
Why would we have to? We should be able to sort the menus in runtime using whatever language is chosen.

Personally I wouldn't want alphabetically sorted menus but for those that do it shouldn't be too hard to make a patch that allows for that option. Hey, I'll even give 'em a headstart: ;)
Code: [Select]
void menu_sort_items(struct menu_item* items, int count)
{
    struct menu_item temp;
    int i = 1;
    for(; i<count; i++)
    { 
        int j = i;
        temp = items[i];
        for(; j>=0; j--)
        {
            if( !j || strcmpi( P2STR(items[j-1].desc),
                               P2STR(temp.desc) ) <=0 )
            {
                items[j] = temp;
                break;
            }
            else
                items[j] = items[j-1];
        }
    }
}