Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Beyond that, there is the possibility to link the "remove" button, at least, > > to the "save" ability. Rather than remove the source when the user clicks > > the button, remove it (or not) upon exit. Because "removed" sources stop > > showing up, you can be certain that the abandonment action will be accurate > > (as opposed to layed edits, which are much harder to implement an undo for). > > Well that's nice but then it might confuse people to be able to > "cancel" the removals but not the additions and modifications > (not counting the proxy config and updating of sources).
Very true. Just looking for an easy solution. There are ways to address everything short of the "update" button by caching the changes until the user exits. But that's always a real pain to program and involves a lot of archetectural changes. In the end, if indeed you go in the direction of having a single close button, it should be fine. The distinction of the action buttons to the right and the checkboxes in the list will be enough for the user to understand that changes made after editing a source will be permanantly committed. > > I hope these ideas help out. Just a bit of one-man brainstorming... > > They do! Thanks. You're welcome. Glad to do what little I can offer to the process... :)
