dev builds
themes manual
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
dev guide

Rockbox mail archive

Subject: RE: Config menu cancel

RE: Config menu cancel

From: Matthew P. OReilly <>
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.


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. :-)


-----Original Message-----
From: []On
Behalf Of Bob Hilliard
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:00 AM
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

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

 - robin.

ps: I downloaded rockbox for the first time last friday -- bloody good work,
Received on 2003-01-13

Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy