Re: An alternative proposal for instant-apply vs. non-instant-apply

[Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu>]

> Here's my proposal.  I think #1 and #2 are relatively 
> uncontroversial; #3 is the heart of the debate we're having.

I agree with #3, I actually disagree with 1 & 2. ;-)

> 1) System settings dialog boxes which can have incorrect settings 
> should never be instant-apply.  These include network settings dialog 
> boxes (where an intermediate setting in, say, an IP address field 
> could be totally incorrect and dangerous).  These dialog boxes should 
> have at least the following buttons:
> 
> [Cancel] [Apply & Close]

[Cancel] [OK] has the strong advantage that its what all the other cool
kids are doing. Maybe [Apply & Close] would have been a better original
choice, but I think [ok] is in our palette now without too much fuss.

> 2) Object property dialogs which have immediate visual effects (say, 
> a style editor in a GNOME word processor or an object properties 
> dialog in GIMP or Dia) should be instant-apply.  They should not have 
> any buttons controlling the window: instead, the user should simply 
> use the standard WM close box or a "close window" menu option to 
> close the dialog, and the standard Undo command to undo actions 
> (which ideally should have an infinite chain).  If there is no Edit 
> menu with Undo available in the application, an "Undo" button should 
> probably be present, although only if it has a reasonable number of 
> Undo levels (i.e. more than 1).

I think an undo button should just be present. Its more consistent. Why
should the user have to think "oh, this application has an edit menu, so
I can undo". I would rather teach my mother "if you make a change you
don't like, just click the undo button".

-Seth