2010/5/21 Conscious User <[email protected]> > > The combination thing is more or less my point: changing status is > common, and responding to messages is common, what I don't think > it's common is doing *both* as a reaction to a message (the > "annoying message" scenario you brought up). >
Annoying messages are only an example. In the real life, I turn on/off my phone by a switch near the display. No one use his TV remote control to turn on/off his phone. This is simply, I think. > > > Moreover, all other interfaces similar to Ubuntu indicator (like dock > > in Mac OS X) work with the behavior that I will. > > There is a reason, I think. The reason is usability and simplicity. > > Users expect this, IMHO. > > But they do this under a application-oriented intention... > Messaging Menu is function-oriented, but each part of it is (partly) application oriented. So you can open contacts, see past messages, create a new message, etc. according to functions of *each application. * You can *start* to receive messages from applications through it, but you *cannot stop*. > A behavior I don't particularly agree with. I agree with > receiving broadcasts in the messaging menu, but only if > they are directed at you (thus, messages). > Well, this could be only partly reasonable because pratical reasons, not design. I think to know the number of unreaded messages from gwibber or pino should be useful and consistent. > And none of them include status changing, which is the core of > my point. :) > My point is usability. To have memenu and messaging menu nearest could be a partial solution. But a switch to stop messaging from an application should be the goal. This doesn't involve the global stautus automatically. > > Re-reading my previous email, there was an epic fail in my > part in not making it clear that I wasn't defending the > developers' point of view (specially because I am not one), > but my own. My intention was disagreeing with you flat-out > saying there's no logical reason, because I see one. > Well, I never said there are no reasons at all. But this reasons should be mixed with usability reasons and with simplicity. It isn't useful to make GUI more complex. > > Sorry for the confusion. > > > That's a very interesting point of view, because a lot of > people agree that the text field in the Me Menu should be > for IM custom status. I personally think an experiment > where it would do *both* would be very interesting. > I think this too. > And, by the way, presenting my view includes disagreeing > with Mark *and* specifications if necessary. :) > Well, it was a misunderstanding. Gospel says: "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27) So I think specifications are made for users, not users for the specifications :) > > If you felt offended by any of > them, I am sorry. > Let's just have a beer and keep discussing productively. :) No problem, have a beer for me :) > (in particular, the very interesting "IMs have broadcast > functions" point you brought up is something I'd like to > focus on) > Yes, but I think this is a separated topic.
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
