On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Alan Horkan wrote: > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:17:12 +0100 (BST) > From: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Gnome UI <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Usability] UI review of overwrite dialog > > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Ross Burton wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:51:48 +0100 > > From: Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Gnome UI <[email protected]> > > Subject: [Usability] UI review of overwrite dialog > > > > Hi, > > > > I've been sent a patch[1] to make the file overwrite dialogue in Sound > > Juicer more powerful. The patch makes the dialogue show the following > > buttons: > > > > _Skip | _Overwrite | _Cancel Ripping | Overwrite _All | _Ignore All > > I remember asking for something like this before and being told that > overwrite all was an exteremely bad idea, not something you would want to > hit accidentally. > > Cannot put my finger on it but hopefully someone how has seen similar > cases before can suggest a solution to address the bigger picture > rather than optimising the specifics of the dialog.
Futher to the idea of tackling the problem elsewhere: you might check for any name conflicts in the default save directory when the users selects a track, rather than waiting until the user chooses to Extract. On this basis you might be able to mark tracks that are already done and you would have less need to warn users later on and could at least provide a smaller set of options. - Alan H. _______________________________________________ Usability mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
