On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 05:38:19PM +0200, peter sikking wrote:

> >>>http://thorwil.wordpress.com/2007/05/18/save-changes-integrated/

> It is a modal dialog situation: we need a decision now.

Yes, the scope being the image. Regarding that one image window, 
a decision is needed, outside not.

> >If users would be damn sure about closing a window with unsaved
> >changes every time, there would be no need for asking back. So
> >the user should be able to see _what_ he's about to save or
> >discard. The image itself is likely to be much more informative
> >than filename and "changes from the last x minutes".
> I find this stress on looking at the image very worrying.
> What drives the decision is the state of mind of users:
> "these changes in the last xy minutes were useful/useless."
> Either this state of mind is there, because the one just
> worked on the file, or it is not there, because one worked
> yesterday on the file. In that case I am not going to
> invite anybody to investigate that within a dialog.
> Back off (Cancel) and investigate with all of GIMP's
> capabilities, I say.

Ok, you have a point here.

> >The dialog is very closely tied to the image window, but still
> >presented  as its own window. Transforming the image window into
> >a Save Changes window is as clear as you can get about the
> >relation.
> I do not think so. First you have to realise that this
> "decide to save the unsaved" is an error scenario, a
> non-task if you will. You are building a full-fledged UI
> for a task that does not exist on users' radar screen.
> That is a misfit.

You never witnessed people using the dialog with the intention 
of triggering a save and closing the window? I did. Of course 
I have no numbers :)
Not that this changes anything here, I just thought "does 
not exist on users' radar screen" is bold, if not wrong.

I think I understand your reasoning and maybe my proposal is 
not good.
I'm not at all convinced about the presentation of this modal, 
tied to another window while looking like any other window 
itself dialog, though.
It already shares focus and minimising with the image window.
It being a semi-separate window is only good for moving it.
Moving it is only good for getting to see the whole canvas. 
If it would not cover any part of the canvas, there would be  
no need to move it. If there's never a need to move it, it 
shouldn't be a semi-separate window.

Of course something could be done on a WM level, like not 
drawing it with a titlebar and placing it right below the 
image window menu bar or whatever placement would emphasize 
the connection.

Thorsten Wilms

Thorwil's Design for Free Software:
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to