Re: UI Rantings [was: Re: gmc and file-selection mockups]

["James M. Cape" <jcape jcinteractive com>]

"Jesse D. Sightler" wrote:
> 
> >I don't have a problem with features in general. What I do have a
> >problem with are poorly implemented features, and I personally haven't
> >heard an idea for a well implemented file selection dialog. As for using
> >the Gmc object, I completely disagree. Gmc should use the Gnome object,
> >not the other way around. I don't want to have to load Gnome and Gmc
> >when Gnome alone would be sufficent -- and since Gnome is loaded with
> >Gmc when it starts anyways... You get the idea.
> 
> I don't quite see your point here.  Are you saying that the gmc "files
> panel" should be a separate component (neither a part of GMC nor the File
> Dialog)?  That seems like a pretty low-level implementation issue to me, so
> I'm not sure what the exact answer is, but my guess is that you are probably
> correct.  :)

That's exactly what I'm saying. If the File Selection Widget (aka the
files panel) is going to be used in more that one part of Gnome, than it
should be part of Gnome-libs, not Gmc. The reason for this is simple --
why load Gnome-libs *and* Gmc when all you want to do is open up a file
in Gedit?

> >> >     Looking over some of the other suggestions, I came accross Double
> >> >Right Clicking. Double Right Clicking?!?!?!? New users have a hard
> >> >enough time dealing with double left clicking, why complicate the
> >> >procedure needlessly.
> >>
> >> Fine, new users would never HAVE to double-right click anything.  It is a
> >> convenience for people like me who like the idea.
> >
> >IMO, there shouldn't be things like that, because they confuse new
> >users. All the functionality should be available all the time, and it
> >should be set up a manner such than even the most inexperienced of users
> >can deal with it.
> 
> Then we had better not do much.  :)  Seriously, "the most inexperienced"
> users still have trouble with adequately controlling mice and understanding
> that there are such things as context sensitive menus.  I know people who
> have used Word/Wordperfect for Windows for years without ever knowing that
> they could print a file without first opening the application and then
> opening the document and then clicking print.  :)  We can't build the user
> interface completely to the lowest common denominator no matter what we do.

Why can't we? I'm not saying don't include anything new users can't
understand. What I'm saying is that don't confuse new users with even
more complexity if you don't need to.

> And besides, right-double-clicking was not intended to replace any other
> action, only add a convenient new way to do things.  Double left-clicking is
> already nothing more than a quick way to access the "Open" item on the
> context sensitive menu, so why not allow double right clicking to "Print"
> for example?

Why throw more uncertainty into the mix. Users (*all* users, BTW) are
used to the simple terminology of "click, middle click, right-click and
double-click". Adding more to the mix is counterproductive.

> > Double Right Clicking doesn't fall into that category.
> >Not even close. (Of course, I'm not even going to go into the carpal
> >tunnel issues...)
> 
> Er, ok, Carpel tunnel issues could be a problem.  It could also be a problem
> for users who aren't knowledgeable enough to know the difference between
> right and left clicking.

Which covers virtually every new user. Even Shaq couldn't browse the web
because he didn't know to double-click. Why should he have to worry
about Double Right Click too?

> -------------------
> Jesse D. Sightler
> http://www3.pair.com/jsight/

    Jim Cape
    http://www.jcinteractive.com

    "All animals are equal, some animals
     are more equal than others."
         -- George Orwell, Animal Farm