Circa 2001-Jul-25 21:58:08 -0400 dixit Gregory J. Barlow:
: This glass door analogy has worn a bit thin. Its not really as
: applicable to this situation as you make it out to be. A menu is
: distinct in its own right,
Perhaps it is currently. Should it be, though? How much so? Think
carefully.
: and the universal way to close any menu is the same at present,
: unlike under your proposed system.
Actually, the way things are currently (blackbox-0.61.1) is a bit
inconsistent and produces unnecessary excise in several cases:
Applications menu:
Open: [RightClick] on root window
Close: [RightClick] on menu or menu titlebar
Workspaces menu:
Open: [MiddleClick] on root window
Close: [RightClick] on menu or menu titlebar
Window-titlebar menu:
Open: [RightClick] on window titlebar
Close: [RightClick] on window titlebar
Submenu (attached to parent):
Open: [LeftClick] on parent menu item
Close: operation not available. [RightClick] on submenu or submenu
titlebar closes both the submenu and its parent, while
[LeftClick] on the parent menu item has no effect.
Submenu (torn off from parent):
Open: operation not available (already open)
Close: [RightClick] on menu or menu titlebar
From the perspective of some users, there's no reason that
[MiddleClick] on the Workspaces menu ought not to make the menu go
away, since both the Applications menu and the Titlebar menu behave
that way (i.e., the same mouse button that opens the menu closes it).
Yet middle-clicking appears to do nothing.
In the same vein, one might expect that [LeftClick] on a submenu's
parent item would close it. Nope. It remains open. How do i close
it?
From a different perspective, one would expect that that [RightClick]
on a submenu would make the submenu go away; yet it makes the whole
menu tree go away. This excise turns into user-interface agony when i
pin the Applications menu and then accidently sweep my mouse over it: a
submenu opens up, and i have no obvious way to close the submenu
without either (a) also closing the whole Applications menu (and having
to re-open the menu and pin it again), or (b) first tearing off the
submenu, then closing it.
Obviously, putting close buttons on pinned (torn off) menus' titlebars
won't solve these problems. I merely point them out to show that
things that may look consistent often aren't. Careful design of menu
behavior can solve these problems.
: So go use windowmaker and leave us with a simple wm.
Ahem. Now you're being totally ridiculous. Take a deep breath, find a
cool beverage, and relax a bit; that will help you to stop responding in
anger or frustration.
Circa 2001-Jul-25 22:45:21 -0400 dixit Gregory J. Barlow:
: That the menu is visible suggests that its torn off. My point is
: far from moot.
Nope. That the menu is visible suggests that it's open. Not all
visible menus are torn off (viz. the titlebar menu, which can't be torn
off at all).
: Consistency is pretty important, and adding a close button is not
: only inconsistent, its just redundant.
Then a close button is redundant on a regular window as well, since
there's a perfectly good "Close" item on the titlebar menu. Likewise,
the resize handles, since [Meta+RightClick] can resize a window.
Apparent redundancy is sometimes necessary for high-quality user
interaction.
: The non-expert user should probably be using GNOME or KDE.
It's not necessary to start that ridiculous argument. Simply because a
user is not an expert at Blackbox doesn't mean that sawmill or kwm/kwin
are the window managers she should use or should want to use.
(Likewise, not all users are novices; in fact, most are "intermediate
level", in between novice and experts).
: > The status quo isn't necessarily the optimal state of affairs.
:
: I agree.
Then we seem to be in agreement, at least on that.
: However, when I first commented on this, I was speaking about
: the status quo.
Ah. The discussion i believed that i was taking part in was about how
to improve the behavior of torn-off menus, partially in the context of
keyboard navigation. I wasn't aware you were taking part in a
different discussion. Perhaps that's the source of our
misunderstanding.
: > : By the way, you seem to have a fairly definitive idea of good/bad
: > : design.
: >
: > Yes. If you don't, you might begin reading some of these:
:
: I do. I happen to think your idea is misguided in some areas.
Then please give some references to back up your opinions.
--
jim knoble | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.pobox.com/~jmknoble/
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.jmknoble.cx/
(GnuPG fingerprint: 31C4:8AAC:F24E:A70C:4000::BBF4:289F:EAA8:1381:1491)
PGP signature
