Re: Enter the build sheriff: Jacob.

[Alan Cox <alan redhat com>]

> In a reply on gnome-list (iirc), Seth made a very good argument for
> the current directional dependence being correct. Even so, I still have
> my doubts, just not enough doubt to make me go through the hoops I'd
> have to go through to settle them.

It should be locale rather than sed 8)

> Again, I'd love to see show stopping argument for flipping RTL/LTR 
> because . . . well, hey, that'd be pretty much CUA-style, and we
> all know how much I love that. ;-)

Well the Fitts law stuff is mostly bogus. As people have noted again and
again - its for one dimensional systems and for single immediate movements.
Even if you extend it a user moves the mouse to dialog edge (like book
edge and anywhere else to avoid fouling the text or other view) then choses
in a second motion. Thats why Apple put both buttons on the right I suspect.

[We hit this in a game or two. Users hated the fact there was content both
 sides of a button. Ever wondered why tooltips in the middle of text are
 so annoying....]

I am curious if Sun also plan to inflict reverse ordering of dialog boxes
between their motif/cde apps and the desktop. As well as what their
application vendors would say 8)

Alan
_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers