On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:28 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > ============================================================ > cancel > End an operation without leaving any side effects. Only use > "cancel" if the operation can be ended cleanly, leaving the > system in the same state as before the operation was started. > Use "stop" instead if ending the operation will result in > partial effects of the operation remaining. > ============================================================ > stop > End an operation leaving some side effects. Use stop if the > operation cannot be ended cleanly, or if ending the operation > will leave it partially completed. Use "cancel" instead if > the operation can be ended cleanly with no side effects. > ============================================================ > > We don't currently have recommendations for these in the > Style Guide, but this jives with the HIG's recommendation: > > http://library.gnome.org/devel/hig-book/stable/feedback-interrupting.html.en I think these two words are clear. The definition meet my expectations of the consequences of their use. I suspect however that many users will not know that 'stop' may leave something in an unwanted state. I don't think a more technical word for 'stop' will help since that introduces jargon problems. So I believe we need to educate users that 'stop' is not a clean cessation of an activity. -- __C U R T I S C. H O V E Y_______ Guilty of stealing everything I am.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part