Hi, In pessulus (a lockdown editor I'm writing), I'm using checkbuttons to configure some boolean settings. This sounds logical and it doesn't look like there's a problem. But there is :-)
In GConf, there can be three states for a boolean key: true, false and unset. Most of the times, we don't care about unset since if the key is unset, a default value will be used. But with pessulus, that's a different matter: it can configure a mandatory value for a key. Eg, it can set the mandatory value of /apps/epiphany/lockdown/disable_history to TRUE to force the disabling of history of epiphany, to FALSE to force the use of history. And if it sets this key to unset, then the user will be able to choose what he wants. So the three states are useful. But how can I do this with checkbuttons in a non-confusing way? I can set the checkbutton to the "inconsistent" state if the key is unset, but I feel it's confusing and not really understandable. Another possibility would be to consider that only one of TRUE/FALSE is useful for lockdown and that when the useless value is chosen, the key is unset. For example, I don't think that, in the previous example, the FALSE value is really useful... It's probably the easier, but I have the feeling that it won't be always possible. What do you think? Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. _______________________________________________ Usability mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
