Re: [Galeon-devel] Re: [Epiphany] Gtk Certificate Dialogs
- From: Reinout van Schouwen <reinout cs vu nl>
- To: Tommi Komulainen <tommi komulainen iki fi>
- Cc: epiphany <epiphany mozdev org>,galeon-devel <galeon-devel lists sourceforge net>
- Subject: Re: [Galeon-devel] Re: [Epiphany] Gtk Certificate Dialogs
- Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 16:41:01 +0200 (CEST)
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Tommi Komulainen wrote:
> > > - According to the HIG, a 'Cancel' button should only be available in
> > > response to a user action. It is debatable whether loading a secure page
> > At one point I had "Reject" (as it is the opposite of "Accept"), but I
> Uhm.. Isn't the user action here clicking a link, or typing an URL?
> Compare that to for example automatic refresh or a scheduled alert, both
> of which are clearly not user actions.
> And the SSL dialog is a direct consequence of that said action. Why
> would it matter whether or not it was known beforehand the dialog would
> be shown?
That doesn't matter, what matters here is if the user is taking an
intentional action by accessing a secure site. Obviously there are more
than enough use cases where this isn't intentional. So a Reject button
is a good idea.
> It only leaves the problem that some button gets the focus initially;
> pressing Enter still activates a button, but that's ever so slightly
> different from having a default button.
Having no default button indeed doesn't solve this problem, so IMO it
would be best to follow convention and have a default button.
How bad would it be to have Reject as default? The webpage would fail to
open and the user would have to try again, this time maybe paying some
more attention to what the message says. It might be annoying to some,
sure, but it is the most safe option.
Reinout van Schouwen Artificial Intelligence student
email: firstname.lastname@example.org mobile phone: lost / kwijt! :-(
] [Thread Prev