On 10/17/07, Oleh Kovalchuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Colloquial, informal and elusive (also personal as well as 'my 2 cents'):
>
> "Delete" is final (barring "undo"), removes the item completely, from all
> lists.
> "Remove" - removes the item from the current list (other lists might still
> contain the item).
>
> Oleh


-----
You will all love my first answer - it depends. And there is no consistent
rule.
Examples:

rm on a unix/linux file system does a very specific thing. Users of those
OSes know what to expect. People not familiar with rm wouldn't have learned
it and probably aren't to be bothered learning x-nix systems.

Since as long as my first Mac - file management introduced the trash can
metaphor. You didn't remove a file - you sent it to the trash, but you could
decide to take things out of the trash which restored the file, or 'take out
the trash' which meant completely deleting a file. MS copied that metaphor
and changed labels, but the context/content/user expectation remained about
the same.

Gmail uses the term "delete" to actually  remove from list, and move to
trash - where you then have to select all and delete the trash as well. I
won't belabor that point since most of us have used gmail. Delete on an OSes
files system does the same thing.

There are at least a few other examples where GUI based OSes have taken one
route. This of course is very different when you are talking about a
relational database, but this is not a dbase discussion list, so we can
ignore that.

Semantically - and to some degree philosophically - I think the two have
different meanings. Unfortunately - that is moot since most thick client
apps, thin client apps, web-apps, and every flavor of OS takes a different
route depending on the mood, intellect, assumptions, caffeine level, and a
host of other issues when the "Foo," thing is being designed by whoever
designed it.

So perhaps we should discuss 'best practices,' by that I mean the following:

   - Allow an action to be undone. Robust Undo, in other words.
   - Allow the user to recover from a mistake. Clearly communicate that.
   - Use labels on action commands that more closely match a tested group
   of user's mental model as to what might actually happen if they do
   something. See Norman "User Centered System Design," to understand what I am
   talking about here.
   - Don't annoy the user with nagging comments if it's a recoverable
   action. When I turn off the car, it does not pop up a display on the
   dashboard asking me if I am sure - because I can easily recover (I know
   that's not true driving down the highway).

I suppose the key is context of action, content action acts upon, and
expectation of user based on user profiles.

Those are my 2 cents (if that).



-- 
~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"
-------------------------------------------------------
will evans
user experience architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://gamma.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to