Hello Ettore, I think you are right from the point of "the up arrow button is harder to understand". But this is caused by understanding link behavior in unix at all. A user who don't understand what the purpose of a link is won't use links - so won't run into the trouble you described. On the other hand, a user - like me - expect to navigate with the up arrow to the parent folder, so to the folder containing the link. Everything is a file so are links. If the links behave like you prefer in nautiulus it is not clear for me which purpose links should have. Your described behavior is more like a bookmark beahvior. So if I want to navigate quickly without running into "link trouble" I would make a bookmark to that folder. So I expect to navigate up to its parent folder (as I do when using links:). I don't want to run into repeating the ARGUMENTS OF THE BUGREPOERTS, which are VERY REASONABLE. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps it would make sense to make an option in nautilus's preferences so users can choose the behavior. The useability team can propose what default option would make sense. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- My two cents again :) On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 04:30, Ettore Perazzoli wrote: > On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 10:30, Alexander Larsson wrote: > > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73937 > > > > > > It fixes the problem of resolving the real path of symlinks in nautilus. > > > The bug is, if you change to a dir which is a symlink i.e. > > > /pub->/misc/pub and click the dir up button you end up in /misc and not > > > /. > > > > > > I think.....see the bug report what other people think about that. > > > > > > The patch contains no change log entry.....be patient with me I'm a > > > newbie volunteer, who need to be educated by you. > > > > > > Would be nice if I could get some feedback. > > > (I know you all are busy hunting "the big bugs") > > > > I agree with the reasoning that we should do it the unix-way, so I'm > > changing this. > > I would hesitate to change the behavior of the application like this > when there is no strong evidence that the new way would actually be any > better for the majority of the users; especially when a bug doesn't have > any duplicates like this one. Maybe some user testing would be in > order?.. (And shouldn't this change be discussed with the usability > team at least?) > > And in fact, I don't agree with this change. The only reason that is > given on Bugzilla is that the old behavior is different from that of a > command-line shell, but if Nautilus is really supposed to imitate the > usability of a command-line shell, then we are all doomed. :-) > > First of all, this makes the notion of a location in Nautilus much more > complicated to understand. Before, "/folder1/folder2/folder3" meant > that you were in folder3 which is contained in folder2 which is > contained in folder1. folder2 was never a link; so it was obvious what > the physical hierarchy of the directory structure on the disk was. Now > instead, "/folder1/folder2/folder3" could mean any sort of things > depending on which of these folders are actually links. IMHO while > links are difficult to understand already, this makes them even more > difficult to grok. (Besides, this is not how the other systems (MacOS > and Windows) work.) > > Also, in the old way the meaning of the up arrow button was very clear: > "bring me to the folder that contains this folder". And it was > consistent too: once you had a certain folder displayed, no matter how > you got there, hitting the up arrow you would always give you the same > result. Now, it becomes all complicated because the expected result of > clicking the up arrow button depends on the history of how you got > there-- which it didn't before. > > So the sum is, changing the behavior in the proposed way would make both > the location bar and the "up arrow" button harder to understand without > adding any usability benefit. > > (BTW, if you want to go to the folder from which you came, you already > have a button for it: the left arrow button. Why blur the behavior of > the already confusing "Up Arrow" button even more?) -- Rolf Kulemann If you give Congress a chance to vote on both sides of an issue, it will always do it. -- Les Aspin, D., Wisconsin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part