Op woensdag 30 maart 2005 20:25, schreef Diego Moya:
> Are you sure the menu says what's going to happen? How do you know
> whether the menu is showing the current state?

I'm not sure if I understand your question, but when an item says "Hide 
Menubar" it means that executing it will hide the menubar. 

> http://www.fast-consulting.com/GUI%20Design%20Handbook/gdhb_a2d.htm

Wow, I didn't know this book was available online. There are references to
this book in the Qt documentation.

> > Two reasons against having toggle menu items which came out of that
> > discussion are:
> > - When an item is not checked, nothing indicates that it can be checked.
>
> ...unless you provide an empty box when it's not checked, like a
> standard checkbox should do. Also the menu text describes the state
> that you're going to have if you click on it.

Yes, that would be the correct solution for the problem.

> My preferred solution would be to have *both* actions listed, and grey
> out the one that is not applicable. As in:
>
> (when the bar is hidden):
>
> -----------------------------------
>  Show Search Bar
>  .H.i.d.e. .S.e.a.r.c.h. .B.a.r.  <-- disabled
> -----------------------------------
>
> (and when the bar is seen):
>
> -----------------------------------
> .S.h.o.w. .S.e.a.r.c.h. .B.a.r.  <-- disabled
> Hide Search Bar
> -----------------------------------
>
> This way
> 1) the user knows what's going to happen when clicking the menu item,
> 2) the user knows that the other entry is disabled because of the current
> state, 3) and you have the extra benefit that the menu items are always the
> same ones (avoiding the uncertainty of a changing interface. Remember MS
> Office disappearing menus?)

It's a clear solution, but it will seem like a waste of space. That will  
certainly encounter some opposition.

Wilco
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability