On 14 Feb 2016 16:06, "Dirk Hohndel" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 03:52:44PM +1100, Rick Walsh wrote: > > > So I tried to implement something that I find reasonable and intuitive. > > > > > > - there's still the save button > > > - the action button is cancel and there is NO CONFIRMATION - you hit that > > > button, you get what you asked for > > > - the back button asks the user if they really wanted to discard the > > > changes, and if they don't confirm within 3 seconds it simply hides the > > > confirmation dialog and pretends nothing happens > > > > > > Please play with it, the description sounds a lot more awkward that it > > > felt to me to use... > > > > > > > The logic is good, and the description makes sense. The reasons I'd rather > > the action button be 'save' are: > > (1) I'm lazy and if all I want to do is enter/alter a couple of details > > (e.g. dive site and buddy), then I don't want to have to scroll down to the > > bottom of the page to find the save button > > (2) we effectively have two quick-access buttons: the action button and the > > back button. Having both do the same thing (with or without confirmation) > > is a bit of a waste. We have two actions that should be accessed rapidly: > > save and discard. The back button can be used to discard changes, so it > > makes sense to me that the action button would be save. > > (3) let's trust the user knows what she's doing - more often than not, when > > the user wants to leave the page, she wants to save changes. We should > > make that as easy as possible. > > I can see your point. So let me rip out the work that I did and implement > that instead. > Sorry, I didn't mean to create more rework. I might have forgotten to mention that it's looking great too.
Rick
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
