Settings Human Interface Guidelines first draft online

[Lamarque V. Souza]

Em Wednesday 04 January 2012, Thomas Pfeiffer escreveu:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > most settings wouldn't be no (the date/time ones works quite well
> 
> currently i
> 
> > think), what would be scary is what can cause any kind of data loss.
> > things like network setting where a wrong preference can send the device
> > offline is a bit on the edge.
> 
> It all depends on the reversibility. Switching Wifi to "off" sends the
> device offline,
> but is by no means scary, since it can be reversed by just switching it
> back on.
> Changing the IP of a proxy, however, is scary in case the user does not
> remember
> the correct one.
> 
> > usually are not irreversible, but may be not obvious to remember how to
> 
> get
> 
> > back (like a forgotten wifi key)
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > as far i remember the reason that nobody ever tried to change this was
> 
> not
> 
> > only technical, there was a bit of discussion at the time and was
> 
> decided not
> 
> > worth. unfortunately that's all i managed to get back from the sands of
> 
> time:
> > http://weblog.obso1337.org/2008/implicit-save/
> 
> Thank you for posting this article! Celeste brings everything to the table
> in a
> very precise manner. This article is by no means a plea against instant
> apply,
> though.
> She just argues that one has to be careful about error prevention when
> doing
> it. And she offers excellent suggestions for avoiding its pitfalls, which
> we definitely
> should act upon.
> As soon as I find the time, I will incorporate the suggestion to offer a
> means to
> automatically revert changes that are not easily reversible manually.
> 
> After reading this article, I'm pretty sure that the reason for Desktop
> Systemsettings
> still not using instant apply at all is that nobody could invest the time
> to
> carefully think about _every_ KCM and look were instant apply makes sense
> and
> where a revert function is needed.
> And I can absolutely understand that, since there are so f**king many KCMs
> that
> it would have taken tremendous amounts of time to do it.
> But that's the cool thing about PA: We're at the beginning, so we still
> have the chance
> to do things right from the ground up. Let's not waste that opportunity,
> even if
> it means a little more time needed now. But if we don't use this chance,
> we
> probably won't get another.
> 
> Cheers,
> Thomas

	What about adding a guidelines to place widgets that interact to the 
user at the upper half of the screen? I thinking about the problem of the 
virtual keyboard hiding a text input, button, etc. That problem happens in the 
active configuration window: the activity name is located at the upper half, 
but the buttons "Save changes" and "Close" are at the bottom half. That forces 
the user to manually move or close the virtual keybard to tap the buttons. If 
the buttons were located at the upper half we would not have this problem. 
What do you think?

-- 
Lamarque V. Souza
KDE's Network Management maintainer
http://planetkde.org/pt-br
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/active/attachments/20120105/6bf6c0d5/attachment-0001.html>