Re: [Usability] List View Column Header Sorting

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 18:55 +0100, Thorsten Wilms wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 01:40:20PM +0000, Calum Benson wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > In this example, no sorting can happen on size and date (filenames, 
> > > having to be unique in every folder, are a terminator). So I left 
> > > out any indicator there. The alternative would be a disabled state 
> > > (grayed-out).
> > 
> > Hmm, I wonder if allowing some columns to be non-sortable really adds
> > much, other than complexity to both the visual and conceptual model.  Is
> > there really ever any reason to actively prevent the user from sorting
> > by a particular column if they really want to?  If it doesn't make
> > conceptual sense to sort a particular column, chances are they just
> > won't bother trying anyway.  And if they happen to try a non-sortable
> > column first, they might well assume that the whole table is
> > non-sortable.
> It wasn't meant as preventing, but rather as indication of the fact 
> that in my example nor further sorting can happen.
> I thought it should look cleaner than using a grayed out disabled 
> state.

Actually, the file names you see don't have to be unique
in a particular folder, because Nautilus doesn't always
display the actual file name.

mkdir test
echo "[Desktop Entry]\nName=test" > test/test1.desktop
echo "[Desktop Entry]\nName=test" > test/test2.desktop
nautilus test


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