connecting/disconnecting from activities

[Arjen Hiemstra]

On Friday 29 July 2011 12:58:32 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2011 12:01:55 Arjen Hiemstra wrote:
> > Put the "Current Activity" in the top menu, and
> > keep the Activities entry that changes to the submenu. This allows you
> > both quick access to the (imo) most relevant entry, and also allows you
> > fine grained control over the associations.
> 
> that's possible, and something i even considered. my concerns are:
> 
> * it means having two entries for the same thing, which means understanding
> why there are two and which one you want
> 
> * this menu will fill up with other items that are likely to also offer
> options, e.g. "Event". it would be nice if there was a consistent workflow
> amongst them all and if we can keep the list as compact as possible (e.g.
> one entry per connection type)

Ah, I did not know that. It would indeed make more sense to make it 
consistent. In the case of events, it is also hard to imagine a "default" 
event to associate with making the below suggestion of merging also a bit 
obsolete.

> 
> the benefit of what you suggest is that one tap is avoided when connecting
> to the current activity. the assumption being tha the current activity is
> the one people will most often choose (which may be an accurage assumption,
> though we don't know yet).

Well, both for connecting and disconnecting. Which is mostly where my current 
annoyance comes from since the Add Resource dialog is rather unclear sometimes 
which means I end up with resources connected that I did not mean to connect, 
so I need to disconnect them which is somewhat annoying.

> 
> imho the added entries and use case inconsistency, which would likely lead
> to higher cognitive load, is not worth it.
> 
> > Possibly they even could be merged
> > into a single entry that behaves slightly different on short/long tap or
> > using some kind of "More" indicator.
> 
> every time long tap is considered, $DEITY kills a kitten. ;P

Noes!

- Arjen