Stefan Küng wrote:
> Molle Bestefich wrote:
> > Simon Large wrote:
> >> enough of this. Counting mouse clicks is not really getting us far.
> >
> > That's not an argument. You're not even trying.
>
> It is an argument. You can think it's not a good one, but an argument it is.
What? No. "I don't care about your argument, so let's not discuss
it" is not an argument.
Well, maybe it is, but then it's an argument to an entirely different
discussion. Replying with which is not a particularly sensible way to
reach any kind of consensus.
> >>> (If you stick to wanting a button because of 508 or MS standards, the
> >>> button should at least invoke a popup menu, not an entire dialog.)
> >> There is precedent for small dialogs.
> >> Word->Insert->Break
> >> Thunderbird->File->Rename
> >
> > Doesn't mean it's a good idea for this purpose.
>
> Popups aren't a good idea here.
That's not much of an argument either.. Why, is it not a good idea?
(And depending on your definition, the current dialog is also a popup.)
> >>> The complaint was of an extremely technical and hypothetic nature.
> >>> I've never seen a real user actually complain about this.
> >> I'm a real user and I have raised it before (for the reason given above).
> >
> > Lonely swan.
>
> Is that a compliment?
Feel free to regard it as one? :-)
No, it just means that Simon is the only one I've ever heard complain
about the way the combo box works *for usability reasons*.
(Thomas complained mostly based on standards compliance [AFAICT].)
> Problem there was that with an additional button, the combobox would
> have to be reduced in size, which again would have reduced the amount of
> text visible of the old messages.
Ok.
> > Again, if the button stays, it should result in a dropdown menu
> > instead of a dialog.
> > In that context it should also be placed on the right hand side.
>
> And the dropdown menu should then show the log messages?
> (and you think the button is ugly...)
Yeah, I don't necessarily think it's going to be ugly.
Guess we're not thinking the same, layout-wise.
Maybe I'll throw together a mockup.
> > (Noting that the current solution is currently inferior to the
> > previous one, even if it does comply with 508 and MS documents.)
>
> I don't think there's an optimal solution here. At least not without
> writing our own control, which is something that will take a hell lot of
> time to do! And I think there are more important things to work on than
> our own controls just for log histories.
Fair enough. Just wanted to vent that I think this was a change for the worse.
(although Lübbe had some suggestions that might improve things.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 17 17:34:53 2005