On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 17:48:52 -0700, Ricky <kf6...@gmail.com> wrote: > Either way, I still see it as of little use with objects I own or am > the creator of! > > As regards the order for objects for which I am neither creator nor > owner I have no suggestion. The current order might make sense. Then > again, Do I ever have permission to /Delete/ someone else's objects? > Not so far as I know. /Return/ would be the only available option, > and then only if I have edit privs on the owner's goods, am in a group > that allows me to return other's goods on the given parcel, or am the > landowner. > > This is starting to sound like it's time for a list: > * I am Owner > ** "Report Abuse" is deactivated (Doesn't make sense!) > ** "Block" is active (I may want to mute my own objects after all!) > ** "Return" is deactivated > ** "Delete" is active > * I am Creator but not Owner and I have no privileges granted > ** "Report Abuse" is deactivated (NOTE) > ** "Block" is active > ** "Return" is deactivated > ** "Delete" is deactivated > * I have been either granted Edit on the Owner's goods, am a member of > a group that the land is deeded to, the group I'm a part of has return > privs, or I am the land owner: > ** "Report Abuse" is active > ** "Block" is active > ** "Return" is active > ** "Delete" is deactivated (Unless for some reason land owners can > delete objects.... This I am unsure of. Typically I've seen them > return items.) > * Otherwise (Not Creator, Not Owner, No Privs) > ** "Report Abuse" is active > ** "Block" is active > ** "Return" is deactivated > ** "Delete" is deactivated > > (NOTE) There may be a use case here for "Report Abuse" to be active on > an object I am the creator of, but not the owner: If the object is > modifiable, it's parts may have been used to make something offensive. > I'd rather keep the option open in this case. > > Order may be largely a preference, but I think that "Delete" should be > topmost, if available as an option. However this may create another > usability issue if the order of items in the menu follows a logical, > but seemingly random to beginners, order depending on context: A first > timer would have difficulty knowing beforehand which item will be in > what position in the menu. So the order may need to be fixed, just > having unusable elements grayed out and deactivated in certain > contexts.
If our aim is to make the menu lighter, cleaner and simpler to read, especially for a newbie, I'd prefer to completely hide those entries from the menu. Grayed and deactivated entries are still being read and their meaning is processed by the brain, so it's only a partial semplification. If the problem is only that one risks to return or abuse-report her stuff, I find it to be a very small and low-priority problem, as both those features have a confirmation window. Personally, I think Delete should be in a submenu and it should NOT be easily available, as we want to avoid it being triggered by error. Opensource Obscure _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
