Re: Comments on dialog proposal

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>]

On 05Sep2001 04:48PM (+0100), Michael Rogers wrote:
> Christian Rose wrote:
> > That's actually why I think "Close" is best suited in an instant-apply
> > dialog. It relates only to the displaying/removal of the dialog, not
> > whether settings are applied or discarded.
> 
> So it's better because it supplies less information? 'OK' indicates
> acceptance of the settings. 'Done' indicates completion of the task.
> What does 'Close' indicate about the contents of the dialog? Only that
> they will no longer be visible.
> 
> It may not be obvious that the changes have already been applied (eg
> tooltip, sound card fragment size, password), so the user needs to know
> whether settings are going to be applied or discarded when the dialog is
> closed.
> 

I understand that you were confused in the case you describe. I think
in time users will be less confused when instant-apply settings
dialogs become the norm (they will assume all settings apply instantly
unless some signal says otherwise).

I really think "OK" ought to be reserved for cases where the button
actually does something in addition to closing the dialog. If both
instant and non-instant dialogs have an "OK" button, users will have a
harder time figuring out which is which, and may not know whether
their settings will stick if they, for instance, use the window
manager close box.

That's why I think it's important to draw a clear distinction even if
users used to the old way may face occasional momentary confusion.

 - Maciej