Re: default widgets misbehaviour
- From: Matt Goodall <mgg isotek co uk>
- To: gtk-devel-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: default widgets misbehaviour
- Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 09:36:33 +0000
Tim Janik wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Matt Goodall wrote:
>
> > Tim Janik wrote:
> >
> > > b) we'll keep the last activated default widget as default widget as long
> > > as the dialog is visible (this is the key to having more than one
> > > default widget making sense)
> > > [this is going to affect property-edit style dialogs only, that supply
> > > default widgets which do not also hide a dialog]
> >
> > Personally, I think that a default widget is a default widget :-).
>
> right, if you have *one* default widget, it should have the default
> activation bound to it. however, it doesn't make sense to have another
> default widget that can never act as a true default widget, that's what
> needs fixing here.
>
> > Having two default widgets doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Ok. (with the current behaviour that is)
>
> > The current
> > behaviour where the default focus is moved when a non-default button is
> > focused and the default focus is restored when something other than a
>
> are you confusing focus and default here? the default stays if a non-default
> button is focussed and the default widget is the one originally having
> the default when the dialog showed up. if another default widget is having
> the default, upon focussing a non-default widget, the default "snaps back" to
> the one originally having the default. (thus preventing other default widgets,
> other than the one originally having the default, to ever act as default
> widgets.)
Ah, I understand what you're getting at now and no, I wasn't confusing
focus and default I just hadn't quite grasped what the problem was.
Having played with this a bit I agree that the current behaviour is
wrong.
> > button gets the focus seems correct from a usability point of view.
>
> wait a second, you outline the current behaviour to be correct for a setup
> that above you claimed `didn't make sense to you'? ;)
That's because the I meant to use the "incorrect" instead of "correct".
Now write out 100 times, "I will always proof read my posts". :-).
Cheers, Matt.
--
Matt Goodall | Isotek Electronics Ltd
email: mgg@isotek.co.uk | Claro House, Servia Road
Tel: +44 113 2343202 | Leeds, LS7 1NL
Fax: +44 113 2342918 | England
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]