Re: [Usability] Interacting with open folders

[Kirk Bridger <kbridger shaw ca>]

On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 18:42 +0000, Alan Horkan wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 17:16 +0100, John Keller wrote:
> > > (And, as Steven said in a parent message, the
> > > "File" menu would make sense for the current-folder options.)
> >
> > Perhaps it would be more intuitive to label that menu "Folder".
> 
> No.  Definately not.
> 
> > I know the HIG generally recommends to have a "File" menu,
> 
> Here's why: a folder is a file.
> Breaking consistency is not a good idea here.
> 

I'm not sure I agree with this statement.  There's no doubt that if you
look deep enough a folder is simply another type of file on the
filesystem.  However to a user, a folder is most certainly not a file.
The two are totally different beasts in a desktop metaphor.

In fact, I wonder just how important the consistency here is, now that
it is pointed out.  The label for that menu could really change
according to what is currently selected, and I'm willing to bet that
most users will still use it just as easily as if it were a static
label.  I know changing things dynamically like this is frowned upon,
but truth be told I think most users simply start with the leftmost menu
when they want to make changes to things.  Many don't use the context
menu, but rather rely on the menus entirely.  The actual label of the
menu is less important in some cases than is its location.

I'm not suggesting that we have the label of the menu change, but I do
think that folder is more apt as it acts upon a folder - not a file, and
the two are not the same to a user.

Kirk