Re: RGSG - File Menu

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: sun <as387@yfn.ysu.edu>
To: Dan Kaminsky <effugas@best.com>; gnome-gui-list@gnome.org
<gnome-gui-list@gnome.org>
Date: Monday, August 03, 1998 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: RGSG - File Menu


>Dan Kaminsky wrote:
>
>> I've never met a user who had trouble figuring out that exiting an
>> application is one way to close all files that the file has open.  They
>> usually do this if the app designer forget to have a Close All command.
>
>"quit" never means "close all files." "quit" means "kill the process."
>closing all files is just a side-effect of killing the process. if you
>still can't understand any of the arguments yet presented against
>file->quit, let this one stand: say what you mean. mean what you say.


Quit doesn't mean kill the process!!!  In Microsoft Word, if I accidentally
hit "Quit", it'll make sure I don't want to lose my progress on unsaved
files.  Same in Photoshop.

This is good, very good, very very good Level 1 functionality.

WHAT IF YOU ACCIDENTALLY HIT QUIT AND LOSE TEN HOURS OF WORK?

>i love the gimp. i keep it open all the time because i'm always
>retouching and color-correcting graphics and photos that friends send me
>via email. it sits on my screen, taking up very little deskspace (as
>it's usually shuffled to the back or kept on a different desktop) and
>usually has no files open.
>
>say i want to restore it to that state after finishing up a fairly large
>project involving several different files.
>
>"file->quit" means the same as "quit files?" no. it means "kill
>process." i don't want to kill the gimp process. i want to keep it alive
>for the future, but "file->close all" is precisely what i want to do.
>
>say what you mean. mean what you say.


I agree there should be a close all.  I also think there should be a close
all and quit.

By the way, I believe there should be a better interface for batch save/no
save choices than n modal displays, n being the number of windows that need
to be saved.

Probably some variant of the "include/remove" dual column set is approp
here.

>> 1)  A consistent phrase in the left hand side increases retention and
>> usability.  (Phrase doesn't have to be File.)
>
>finally, the first argument i've actually seen from you that tells why
>it's a good idea to keep it.
>
>however, the same argument stands for tmfkap.


Why thank you.  I've added a few more since this went up.  I'm sure I'll
write a full white paper on the topic before I'm done with it.

You know you've entered geekdom when you're considering writing "In Defense
Of File".

>> 2)  File is standard--this must be considered, Aquinas has a point here.
>
>it's being considered, but the fact that it exists now does not make a
>good argument for it.


It makes an argument.

>> 3)  "Program"--so am I saving a program?
>
>wasted argument, considering that nobody has proposed moving "save,"
>"open," "save as," "close," et al to tmfkap. only "quit" and other
>options which apply to the whole application.


Exactly, the only thing we KNOW belongs in program is Exit, past that, we're
gonna have arguments forever and ever.

More confusion for the user?  Count me out :-)