On Sunday 07 November 2010, David Jarvie wrote: > On Sunday 07 November 2010 09:31:44 Ingo Klöcker wrote: > > On Saturday 06 November 2010, Ingomar Wesp wrote: > > > Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > > > > I have been quite busy trying to convince everyone actions to > > > > toggle UI items such as menubar, toolbars, sidebars or > > > > statusbar should be labeled "Show/hide Foo" depending on the > > > > visibility of Foo rather than implemented as a checkable "[ ] > > > > Show Foo" item. > > > > > > Having followed the discussion and how you fought to get this > > > change in, I'm a bit saddened that it turned out to not work so > > > well in practice. > > > > > > Maybe we can tackle the underlying issue in another way. If I > > > understood the problem correctly, it basically boils down to > > > > > > [X] Show Foo > > > > > > textually implying the opposite of the action that the user is > > > going to trigger if (s)he clicks it. If we keep the checkboxes, > > > maybe we are able to change the text, so that it is obvious that > > > it describes the current state rather than an action by changing > > > the verb into an adjective: > > > > > > [X] Foo shown > > > [X] Foo visible > > > [X] Foo enabled > > > > > > Just an idea... > > > > IMHO that does not really fix the problem. I think the real problem > > is that we think that an additional qualifier like "Show" or > > "shown" is necessary. As if our users would not understand what > > the state of the checkbox preceding the menu entry signifies. > > > > I just had a look at Firefox (maybe others can check applications > > from other "vendors" like Apple, Microsoft, etc.) > > > > Firefox has the options to show/hide certain UI components in the > > View menu (while we have them in the Settings menu). In this menu > > Firefox simply lists the UI components names without any verbs, > > adjectives, etc., i.e. > > > > View > > > > Toolbars > > > > [x] Navigation Toolbar > > [x] Bookmarks Toolbar > > > > [x] Status Bar > > > > Sidebar > > > > [ ] Bookmarks > > [ ] History > > > > Does it really matter that Firefox has those options in the View > > menu while we have them in the Settings menu? I don't think so. > > > > So, why don't we simply get rid of "Show" (and the "Shown" in > > Settings- > > > > >Toolbars Shown). IMHO those qualifiers are totally superfluous in > > > > combination with checkboxes. Our convention to add the "Show" does > > stem from a time where we could (and did) hide the checkboxes of > > checkable menu entries. Apparently, with Qt 4 the checkboxes of > > checkable menu entries cannot be hidden. Since we are already at > > Qt 4.7 it seems very unlikely that QtDF will ever change this. So > > why insist on a convention that does not make any sense anymore? > > I agree about removing "Show" etc. But if this is done, the menu > items should be moved to the View menu. In the Firefox example you > give, the menu name (View) puts the meaning of the menu items in > context and acts as the verb, giving the necessary hint to the user > that the checkboxes determine the view state of the respective > items. Removing the verb and leaving them in the Settings menu would > IMO make their meaning a bit unclear.
Do you really think this would be a bit unclear? What else would an unchecked UI element in any menu mean? Quite frankly, I cannot image the number of users which grasp "[ ] Show Toolbar" but not "[ ] Toolbar" to be significant. Surely, there are a lot of not that computer literate people (like my parents) who understand neither one nor the other. But people who understand the former, but not the latter? I claim that such people do not exist. Prove me wrong! ;-) Regards, Ingo
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
