|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: RE: Config menu cancelRE: Config menu cancel
From: Matthew P. OReilly <moreilly_at_moreilly.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:11:42 -0500 I agree as well; "Stop" in most contexts is most intuitively "cancel". Björn is right, though, we shouldn't change settings like that lightly. *however* In this case, I really like the immediacy of the setting changes. (I'm only a Recorder owner, so forgive me if the Player functionality is different.) It's possible to notice the scroll speed change in the heading as soon as the value changes. So when a setting takes effect immediately - without the need to exit that setting dialog - there is no need, IMO, for an accept or decline dialog. It's already in place, and all you're going to do by hitting "stop" is go back to the previous menu. (It's the same as the "left" button on the recorder, yes?) So the "stop" button functionality is not "accept and go back", it's just "go back", because there is no "accept", per se. BTW to whoever made the "bidirectional" dialog the only heading in the display settings dialogs which actually is bidirectional - that's friggin' brilliant. :-) Matt -----Original Message----- From: owner-rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se [mailto:owner-rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se]On Behalf Of Bob Hilliard Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:00 AM To: rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se Subject: Re: Config menu cancel > You could be right. But I think it's too confusing > to change this now. I'm OK with adding so that > PLAY exits the setting too, just like STOP/OFF. Good idea. Having to press the 'cancel' button to save a setting is counter-intuitive. I would, however, recommend that, in the long term, it's better to define the play/pause as 'ok', and stop/off as 'cancel'. Any other way is upside-down. - robin. ps: I downloaded rockbox for the first time last friday -- bloody good work, guys. Received on 2003-01-13 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |