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

[Matthew Berg <wdomburg pce net>]

Jesse D. Sightler wrote:
> 
> >You open a copy of the Open Dialog to print something. That is behavior
> >you learned from Win9x, and because you've gotten into a bad habit of
> >doing it, would like to be able to do in Gnome as well.
> 
> No, I just find it quicker than opening a file manager, browsing to the
> file, and then right-clicking on it and clicking print.  :)  Using the open
> dialog saves several steps.

Am I missing something here?  Seems like that shortcut has at least as
many steps, sometimes more than what you're complaining about.

<click on file manager> -> <browse> -> <click on print>

<hit open accelerator> -> <browse> -> <click on print>

<click on file menu> -> <choose open> -> <browse> -> <click on print>

Not to mention that shortcuts should not be thrown in where they don't
make any sense.  It's like having a combination ginzu knife/marital aid;
sure, it may be convienent, but it's messy.
 
> >I completely,
> >firmly, and undeniably disagree with this idea, because it is completely
> >counter-intuitive, and new computer users (not just new Linux users)
> >should never find anything that forms bad habits. Don't copy
> >bad-habit-forming things from Windows just because they are there and
> >you have made it a bad habit. Break your bad habit, don't spread it to
> >others.
> 
> Ok, so you think that using the context menu of a file is a bad habit for
> printing?  Please explain to me what is bad about it.  Go into detail about
> this, too, as I really don't see the problem here.

Right-clicking for a context menu is a consistent action, which brings
up options that are actually /in context/.  Printing with an open file
dialog does not fall into this category.
 
> >Copy and Move are grey areas, and I personally wouldn't object to them
> >because they can be useful.
> >
> >Delete and Rename need to be there, IMO.
> 
> Agreed, on both counts.  :)

I would even contest this much.  These are not things that are a natural
extention of the dialog in question. 

A save file dialog would definitely have a place for move/rename and
mkdir, as one may want to move the older version of their file to a
backup, or may decide to create a new directory for their document.

On the otherhand, delete and copy are unnecessary to both open and save
dialogs.  These are file manager issues that shouldn't be dealt with in
this  context.

> >However: Cancel should undo *all* changes. Period. I don't care if
> >Windows does it wrong, Cancel should *always* return *everything*
> >(*including* the filesystem) to it's original state, as if the dialog
> >had never been opened. I can't possibly stress this one single point
> >enough.
> 
> Remember here, though, that the problem is that what if after doing all of
> my file-management related things I decide I didn't really want a doc opened
> to begin with.  :)  Then I'm gonna really wish I had a "cancel only my last
> action button".  In other words, cancel really is inconvenient in these
> circumstances (er, cancel the print job, too?).

And the answer to this is that you shouldn't be doing any of that within
those dialogs.  This is an even stronger argument against making open
and save dialogs mini file managers, as it necessitates making the
cancel funciton counter-intuitive.

Cheers,
  Matthew