From kde-usability Tue Sep 21 17:22:39 2004 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9bastien_Lao=FBt?= "\[temporar\]" Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:22:39 +0000 To: kde-usability Subject: Re: KDE 3.3 review and configuration menu Message-Id: <1095787359.4880.7.camel () localhost ! localdomain> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-usability&m=109578740202749 Le mar 21/09/2004 à 18:44, Aaron Seigo a écrit : > 3. they are put in well known places. users come to rely on the fact that they > are always there in the menu of (nearly) every application. this greatly > speeds up finding these tools as opposed to having to search for them in the > application configuration dialogs. I particulary agree with this point. If we look better at KDE applications, settings that are in the "Configure FooBar" dialog are _specific_ to FooBar. Configuring shortcuts is common to almost every KDE applications. It also allow to have less clutter in config dialog, as pointed out before. This distinctions is quite unusual to Windows users, but I think (yes: I have no prouf of that!) that for the long therm it's better to have such features in reliable places. This is even more suitted to have separate dialog for editing toolbar since right clicking a toolbar (an object) allow to popup the toolbar editing dialog. If this dialog is about to be embedded in the Config dialog, is configuring the toolbar by right clicking the toolbar should show the whole Config dialog? I would answer yes, for consistency (a feature should appears in only one place, have a 'single dialog' and 'embedded' version could make users thing they are not the same). That would confuse even more the user, who *only* want to configure the toolbar he right clicked. My 1 cent. _______________________________________________ kde-usability mailing list kde-usability@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability