Re: A matter of principle [Re: HIGification of dialog boxes]

[Lars Clausen <lrclause cs uiuc edu>]

On 18 Jul 2003, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> Le Fri, Jul 18, 2003, Ã 06:42:34PM +0200, Krzysztof Foltman a Ãcrit:
>
>
> > 1. SDI app.
> >
> > One file = one window with menu. Toolbox etc are in a separate window 
>
> This is what Hubert Figuiere did... hmmm... two, if not three years ago.
> It's a flag in the preferences.
>
> You can also put the toolbox as a toplevel window.
>
> > 2. MDI app (tabbed or windowed etc).
>
> argh, no please not going back to Windows 3.0

Now look what you did, Krzysztof, you nearly made Cyrille go catatonic
again:)

The only thing I have to say about the size issue is that the diagram ought
to be resizable to smaller than the starting width.

> > As for Try (vs Apply)- it suggests (more clearly than Apply) that it's a
> > temporary choice you can revert by clicking Cancel.
>
> Yep, I like that (though I'm used better to "apply").
>
> > I *wouldn't*. Undo button in the default line width dialog box shouldn't
> > modify anything except what's related to default line width. Otherwise,
> > it may get confusing. Unless you meant using application Undo stack, but
>
> so you have now two undo stacks. Urgh. I don't think we can efficiently
> express in a graphical way that concept so that over time users' mental
> model evolve into what we're doing (not that it's the order things are
> supposed to run, but bear with me). So, the practical result is that they
> end up with two undo buttons/commands, which they would test at random
> until they know they undid what they intended (and hopefully not what
> they didn't intend to).
>
> Seems like we either get modal and then we don't need a dual undo stack
> (because the "cancel" button plays the role of the secondary single-slot
> undo stack in a way users know about and are accustomed with), or we do
> modal but with close-and-undo buttons (which might as well be renamed OK
> and Cancel), or we don't do modal and we are now into dual-undo stack
> madness.  Sorry, but I don't buy the advantages of instant apply in that
> context (I may miss something).

I'd like to point out that the current setup is non-modal with Ok and
Cancel buttons (i.e. explicit apply).  Does it appear to be confusing?  

I understand the concern about 'difficult' properties like color and
complex text needing a proper undo.  But we don't currently have any better
undo than what the instant apply offers, we just have an extra button to
press before things take effect.  We have no help seeing what the results
are until we press Apply, and once we do, there's no other way back than
the undo stack anyway.  

The only thing that's better about the current setup than instant apply is
if you change a setting, but can tell that it's not what you want before
applying, in which case Cancel discards those changes.  But how often do
you change a setting and decide it's wrong before applying?

I'd rather have instant apply and then an easy access to the undo stack in
the properties dialog -- at the very least allow the keyboard shortcut, if
not adding an undo button.

As an aside, I think the original instant apply comment was about the
preferences and diagram properties (grid etc), not object properties, and
there's no undo stack for those anyway.  But we need to be consistent.

-Lars

-- 
Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| HÃrdgrim of Numenor
"I do not agree with a word that you say, but I   |----------------------------
will defend to the death your right to say it."   | Where are we going, and
    --Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire  | what's with the handbasket?