home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 12:16:06 -0400 (EDT)
- From: Timothy Miller <millert@undergrad.csee.usf.edu>
- Subject: Re: Pre-vote proposal
- To: gem-list@world.std.com
- In-Reply-To: <tlprunrwfdk@moacs11>
- Message-Id: <Pine.3.87.9406211206.B7860-0100000@grad>
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Precedence: bulk
-
-
- Warwick:
-
- )Please remember that these keys are for ALL APPLICATIONS, not just those
- )with cursors. For many applications, select all is a fairly safe, very
- )common opperation. Take for example, a vector graphic drawing program:
- )very often, the user selects all and does a group modification such as
- )moving them, scaling them, etc.
- )
- )Solving the Ctrl-A danger by making the key obscure is an ALL-APP change
- )since all apps should use the same key, but the solution of using a pop-up
- )in the almost-always-a-typo case of Ctrl-A + character key can be
- implemented
- )just for those apps for which Ctrl-A is dangerous.
-
- Yes, it's for all applications, therefore it should be SAFE for all
- applications. If if is obviously and blatantly dangerous for one
- application (word processing, one of the more common), then it doesn't
- belong.
-
- Shift-Ctrl-A is NOT hard to hit, but is takes deliberation, which is what
- we need for such a dangerous operation. ANY dangerous operation should
- require deliberation, although that doesn't require it to be HARD to hit.
-
- Take Ctrl-Q, for example. Now, I HAVE hit it before accidentally, but it
- was a total blunder. Generally, it is not something that one would
- accidentally hit, yet it's not HARD to hit if you really want to.
-
- Now Select-All, I'm afraid, is NOT that commonly used. Maybe in graphics
- apps, and a few others, but often the user will be using the mouse, not
- the keyboard, so they'll likely click on an icon on a tool bar (take
- something like Outline Art, for example.). On the other hand,
- Shift-Ctrl-A isn't hard enough to hit that it would really pose any
- difficulty for the user of such an app, and besides, it makes
- wordprocessing a lot safer.
-
-
- )Michael Nolte:
- )> reLOAD tells me more than reVERT.
- )
- )Really? Reload could mean `load another copy'. `Revert' has a very precise
- )meaning.
- )
- This is precisely the point I had made.
-
-
- Forget:
-
- )Background information is nice; having a short note about when it was
- )ratified and how many people were on the list to help create it would
- )give the user a sense of validity to the proposal. It is much more
- )credible to say "100 developers support this" than "I support this"... :)
-
- This is no more difficult than adding any other dialog to a resourse if
- you want to make it simple. I'll do it.
-
-
- Scott Sanders:
-
- )I suggest that we don't dillute this discussion further by adding
- )layers to the original proposal such as specialized key equivalents
- )and other matters. There is nothing wrong with a v2.0 later so long
- )as it doesn't change what's in v1.0.
-
- I suggest we get it right the first time.
-
-
-
-