Le 16/09/2016 à 13:53, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit :
Am Freitag, den 16.09.2016, 13:41 +0100 schrieb Guillaume Munch:
Am Freitag, den 16.09.2016, 12:39 +0100 schrieb Guillaume Munch:
Now one will expect "search on the fly" to be always activated,
for
consistency for other search fields. If this is done, it makes
sense
to
assign "Enter" to focus the available citations.


Note that this setting is saved between sessions, so everybody can
set
it as s/he feels fit.


I don't think this is related to my point.

I think it is, although I did not spell out my argumentation.

Thank you for clarifying.


The ones that "will expect 'search on the fly' to be always activated"
(and I doubt you can generalize that to a general "one" -- I am the
example that will falsify such a claim) can easily preset it once and
for all.

Actually I did generalize, by giving an objective reason: consistency
with other search fields.

I do not think that it all comes down to the tastes and habits of
developers. On the contrary, I believe that this sort of argument does
not lead to great design: it leads to dialogs with three different ways
to validate changes, where a button "Apply" does not have the same
effect between the two preferences dialogs, and where one is offered the
choice to search as one types or not. Another consequence is that I
often refrain myself from making (what I find are) small improvements
because I know that such changes can trigger long discussions.


The proposal to assign "Enter" to a different function seems to imply
the proposal to remove the option to toggle "search on fly". If you
mean this, I will object, since I'd like to have it switched off.

Yes, this is what I mean.


We could assign "Enter" to a second function anyway (if "search on fly"
is activated or even if it isn't, after the filter has been applied),
but I think this would be irritating. And in general, I think that the
binding of the Enter moving widgets is quite opaque.

What's wrong with Alt-V?


Nothing is wrong with Alt-V.


Reply via email to