[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: Home in Konqueror
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2005-08-14 21:25:30
Message-ID: 42FFB6CA.9030504 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 14. August 2005 16:04, schrieb James Richard Tyrer:
> 
>> While adding the code to show "System" in the "Go" menu in 
>> Konqueror, it occurred to me that we could also add "Home Folder" 
>> and "User Files" (or whatever we decide is the best name) if it is
>>  not set to $HOME.  Well I considered this before -- probably
>> posted it somewhere.
> 
> 
> Is there somewhere a concept paper to be read to understand what is 
> all behind those new protocols coming in? Does anyone think about 
> localization at all?

Apparently not.  I would like to see i18n names for directories (or
should I say folders?).  This should be simple, just put it in the
".directory" file.

> system:/users, system:/documents (not files?) et al. makes me shiver.
>  What's next? music:/favourites/classic/mozart? Those protocols do 
> not even signal "local file" and break a lot of behaviour. At least. 
> Look forward to a lot of bug reports.

I do wonder about it as well.  Does it accomplish anything that couldn't
be accomplished with VFS?  I don't see that it does.  But, perhaps
someone could enlighten us.

> Which are the problems that are to be solved by this? Or is it 
> because we can? Kevin, or whoever works on this, please rethink this.
> 
I don't think that Kevin had a usability study done before he did it. 
Current 3.5 still has: "Users Folders" which give you access to all of 
the HOME folders of all the user accounts.  Now, if I only knew why I 
would want that ... .
> 
>> But, now it occurred to me (the ah-ha) that this would solve the 
>> argument over the local verses web Home.  Both the programmable 
>> "Home" and the hard coded "Home Folder" would be on the "Go" menu 
>> and the user could put both of them on the toolbar if they wanted 
>> to.
>> 
>> One minor detail would be the "kfm_home" icon which should have 
>> always have a folder -- not just the house (it does in some icon 
>> sets [including mine]).
> 
> 
> Seems I missed something, here or in the settings. So nowadays the 
> "home location" button points to the same location both in web 
> browsing mode and all other modes? Duh.

Actually, there isn't a browsing mode and a file management mode.  There 
are only profiles, which don't really work that well since they save 
more than just the browser configuration (and less as well).

> Why is this not adjustable per protocol? Really to complex for 
> people?

Since you are free to open web pages in the file management profile and
open local directories in the web browser mode, this does have problems
since you couldn't really be certain of which you would get.

> Why not change the icon per mode then, too?  So people will see it 
> has a different reaction. Is there really the perception both joe 
> user and joe developer want a single button in all modes which points
>  to the same location? Which seems to default to $HOME? Unbelievable.
> 
Yes, it is an issue.

> Then the start button in the web browsing should be requested. Who 
> makes really use of it?

I don't but a significant number of users seem to want that feature.

> And when pointing into the net, does everyone have only one base 
> location in the web?

Apparently, these users either use their ISP's home page or they use
Yahoo, etc. as a web home.

> Isn't it just a prominently placed bookmark? Why couldn't there be
> more? There even is already, the search bar. No, the bookmarks
> toolbar does not help here, it is outside the main toolbar and breaks
> the design if used for such base locations.*

Makes logical sense since all the Home button is is another bookmark. 
But, users expect a browser to have a home button.  Just as they expect 
there to be two browser modes.  To some extent, we need to provide what 
the users want as long as it is reasonable.  I don't use separate 
browser modes (it was rather difficult to change this because it isn't 
directly configurable) so, if I wanted both Home locations, I would need 
two buttons.  But, it is no problem for me since I do not use a web home 
page.

> If we really need a root of all places we want to go (this might be 
> the source of the home metapher there) I would rather welcome a local
>  portal website, being a mixture of the kontact base screen 
> (technical) and the about-screen of konqueror (functional). It would,
>  configurably, nicely laidout, contain e.g. selected RSS feeds, one's
>  first level bookmarks and the locations in the Go menu. Protocol 
> name? base:, start:, whatever:
> 
> Sorry for perhaps too much rant, seems I need to start to blog, too 
> Friedrich
> 
> *Possible solution: Ability to add menu/toolbar entries (remember: 
> those are commands) which take parameters and could be set per entry
>  by the user. Here it could be used for multiple 
> goto:url+icon+name+shortcut, in other places it could be e.g. 
> setcolor:blue+name+shortcut and 
> substitute:old+new+all+dontask+name+shortcut, you get the idea, 
> oneliner-makros.

I have also been accused of being long winded. :-)

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

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]