Re: Proposal for bug 73937 / symlinks in nautilus

Hello Ettore,

I think you are right from the point of "the up arrow button is harder
to understand".
But this is caused by understanding link behavior in unix at all. A user
who don't understand what the purpose of a link is won't use links - so
won't run into the trouble you described. 
On the other hand, a user - like me - expect to navigate with the up
arrow to the parent folder, so to the folder containing the link.
Everything is a file so are links.

If the links behave like you prefer in nautiulus it is not clear for me
which purpose links should have.

Your described  behavior is more like a bookmark beahvior. So if I want
to navigate quickly without running into "link trouble" I would make a
bookmark to that folder. So I expect to navigate up to its parent folder
(as I do when using links:).

I don't want to run into repeating the ARGUMENTS OF THE BUGREPOERTS,

Perhaps it would make sense to make an option in nautilus's preferences
so users can choose the behavior.
The useability team can propose what default option would make sense.

My two cents again :)

On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 04:30, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 10:30, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > It fixes the problem of resolving the real path of symlinks in nautilus.
> > > The bug is, if you change to a dir which is a symlink i.e.
> > > /pub->/misc/pub and click the dir up button you end up in /misc and not
> > > /.
> > > 
> > > I think.....see the bug report what other people think about that.
> > > 
> > > The patch contains no change log patient with me I'm a
> > > newbie volunteer, who need to be educated by you.
> > > 
> > > Would be nice if I could get some feedback.
> > > (I know you all are busy hunting "the big bugs")
> > 
> > I agree with the reasoning that we should do it the unix-way, so I'm 
> > changing this.
> I would hesitate to change the behavior of the application like this
> when there is no strong evidence that the new way would actually be any
> better for the majority of the users; especially when a bug doesn't have
> any duplicates like this one.  Maybe some user testing would be in
> order?..  (And shouldn't this change be discussed with the usability
> team at least?)
> And in fact, I don't agree with this change.  The only reason that is
> given on Bugzilla is that the old behavior is different from that of a
> command-line shell, but if Nautilus is really supposed to imitate the
> usability of a command-line shell, then we are all doomed.  :-)
> First of all, this makes the notion of a location in Nautilus much more
> complicated to understand.  Before, "/folder1/folder2/folder3" meant
> that you were in folder3 which is contained in folder2 which is
> contained in folder1.  folder2 was never a link; so it was obvious what
> the physical hierarchy of the directory structure on the disk was.  Now
> instead, "/folder1/folder2/folder3" could mean any sort of things
> depending on which of these folders are actually links.  IMHO while
> links are difficult to understand already, this makes them even more
> difficult to grok.  (Besides, this is not how the other systems (MacOS
> and Windows) work.)
> Also, in the old way the meaning of the up arrow button was very clear:
> "bring me to the folder that contains this folder".  And it was
> consistent too: once you had a certain folder displayed, no matter how
> you got there, hitting the up arrow you would always give you the same
> result.  Now, it becomes all complicated because the expected result of
> clicking the up arrow button depends on the history of how you got
> there-- which it didn't before.
> So the sum is, changing the behavior in the proposed way would make both
> the location bar and the "up arrow" button harder to understand without
> adding any usability benefit.  
> (BTW, if you want to go to the folder from which you came, you already
> have a button for it: the left arrow button.  Why blur the behavior of
> the already confusing "Up Arrow" button even more?)

-- Rolf Kulemann

If you give Congress a chance to vote on both sides of an issue, it
will always do it.
		-- Les Aspin, D., Wisconsin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]