Use of KMessageBox::warningYesNo for continue/cancel questions.
bastian at kde.org
Fri Jun 20 20:22:45 BST 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 20 June 2003 19:39, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2003 10:53, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > You mention KMail but KMail uses warnngYesNoCancel to confirm sending. It
> > will surely not be affected by a change in warningContinueCancel's
> > behaviour.
> true... but this makes warningContinueCancel different from
> warningYesNoCancel due to the difference between "Continue" and "YesNo"
> when the real issue is the severity (e.g. warning) of the dialog...
> more to the point, i just grep'd KDE CVS for warningContinueCancel usage
> and found 224 instances. not all seem to be guarding "dangerous" or
> inconvenient actions, though most/all are warnings of some sort. i'm
> concerned about simply changing the semantics of an existing dialog like
> that, since it does impact pretty heavily how the user interacts with the
> > Konqueror should use warningContinueCancel in the cases that you changed,
> > and if that doesn't give the desired result then warningContinueCancel
> > should be adjusted.
> hrm... as per our recent IRC chat, how about the attached patch? this would
> allow the application to tell KMessageBox if the action is "dangerous" and
> should therefore be protected by safer defaults, allow applications to use
> the "proper" KMessageBox variants, and not alter the current default
> behaviour nor add any new methods to KMessageBox...
I think that would be a good solution indeed.
bastian at kde.org -=|[ SuSE, The Linux Desktop Experts ]|=- bastian at suse.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel