* Jamie Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-08 14:31:18 +0100]: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 02:40:15PM +0200, Leif Frenzel wrote: > > the tree representation would look like > > > > A - B - C > > | > > - D - C > > > > suppose you select B in the UI, this would automatically select A, C and > > D go unselected. If you select C, then A, B and D would be selected with > > it (even if the entire D branch was collapsed and not visible to the > > user so far; we should automatically expand it in that case). > > That's bad. If I select C and then change my mind, I have to figure > out which additional patches suddenly became ticked and untick them. > That defeats the exploratory nature of good UI design. Either that or > it starts getting more complicated with an 'undo' button, etc.
Just have tristate checkboxes; all checkboxes start in a sort of "indeterminate" state whereby they are not selected unless a dependency causes them to be. Clicking on C would set C to the selected state, and now A, B, and D would be "temporarily" selected, but still in the "indeterminate" state. You can then deselect C, and return to the original situation. -- mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
