RE: [patch] Bug 88585, Sorting of size column is messed up

["Blad, John Erling" <john erling blad aftenposten no>]

Sort order should always follow the locale.
Period.

A single selected item should stay in view unless
there are some very good reasons for not doing this.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darryl Rees [mailto:rees netnam vn]
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 2:29 PM
> To: nautilus-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: [patch] Bug 88585, Sorting of size column is messed up
> 
> 
> Surely ascending size should be smallest to biggest, ascending date 
> should be forward chronological time, and arrows should point in the 
> ascending direction, this all seems pretty intuitive (and is moreover 
> almost always implemented that way).
> 
> If we want to argue that invoking a sort (one click) should 
> default to 
> ascending or descending order, surely that's a separate issue 
> to which 
> direction the arrows point. Related to this issue (if you 
> think about it 
> enough)... currently if an item is selected, and you click on 
> a header 
> to re-sort, the item stays selected but is not necessarily 
> kept in view; 
> a lot of apps with sortable columns will try to keep the 
> selected item 
> in view (multiple selected items? too hard!).
> 
> Note Mozilla/Netscape always defaults to ascending after one 
> click, as 
> does fileroller. Gnumeric has a little down arrow with a->z means 
> ascending as I've described and up arrow with z->a for descending as 
> I've described.
> 
> It's a hard ask to guess the most preferred one-click 
> defaults without 
> doing user testing. When I'm looking through ANY kind of alphabetical 
> column I will use forward alphabetical order, even if I'm looking for 
> items beginning with 'w' or 'y'... just zoom to the end of 
> the list. I 
> imagine there could be lots of people who think this way with 
> chronological items as well.
> 
> Once there is a 'definitive answer' on this maybe it should go in the 
> gnome usability guide?
> 
> 
> Darryl Rees.
> 
> Braden McDaniel wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 00:21, David Watson wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, David Emory Watson wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>To see one reason why we shouldn't go with your 
> suggestion (i.e. the
> >>>>evolution way) think about this: if we change the 
> ordering for names
> >>>>in the list view then we become inconsistent with the 
> icon view.  If
> >>>>we change the ordering for the icon view, then "sort by 
> name" becomes
> >>>>reverse alphabetical order!?
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>I do not see why that is. An ascending alphabetical sort *is*
> >>>"alphabetical order", not reverse alphabetical order.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>The list view is currently _designed_ to match the icon 
> view.  When column
> >>$foo is clicked, the list is sorted into the same order 
> used in in the
> >>icon view when "Arrange Items" -> "By $foo" is selected.  
> If a column is
> >>clicked twice, the same effect is the same as selecting 
> "Arrange Items" ->
> >>"Reversed Order".
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >What has this got to do with making the arrow point the correct
> >direction for a given ordering?
> >
> >  
> >
> >>>If in the end it is arbitrary, it is broken.
> >>>
> >>>up = ascending, down = descending. That's not arbitrary at 
> all. That's
> >>>logical.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Sure, it's logical.  Your just using the wrong logic (i.e. 
> your axioms are
> >>arbitrary and I don't accept them).
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >What are the arbitrary axioms you think I'm using?
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> nautilus-list mailing list
> nautilus-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
>