From: "Lewis" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (account lgrosenthal@2rosenthals.com HELO [192.168.100.23]) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.10) with ESMTPSA id 1325340 for lswitcher-dev@2rosenthals.com; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:50:21 -0500 Subject: Re: [lswitcher-dev] Properties notebook verbiage To: lSwitcher Developers Mailing List References: Message-ID: <5FBDD479.8050507@2rosenthals.com> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:50:17 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; Warp 4.5; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0 SeaMonkey/2.35 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi... On 11/22/20 09:23 am, Alfredo Fernández Díaz wrote: > Hi, > > On 20/11/22 05:09, Lewis wrote: >> On 11/21/20 06:28 pm, Gregg Young wrote: > > [ticket 79] >> The gist of it is that we have a properties notebook with four tabs: >> >> Popup | Taskbar | Miscellaneous | About >> >> In the help, we refer to the "Taskbar" as the standalone lSwitcher bar, and >> "Widget" as the XCenter widget. The properties tab includes settings for >> both >> the Taskbar and the Widget, so the label is misleading (implying only >> Taskbar >> settings on those pages). In fact, page 2 of that tab includes Mouse >> actions, >> and page 3 has our Exclude filters. Clearly, the label "Taskbar" is >> inappropriate. > > I hadn't noticed this until you mentioned it. I admittedly use the widget > very little (mostly some testing), but I always thought of that tab as > "Taskbar - whether standalone or widget", so no big deal for me. > I see it as better aligning to how we differentiate the Taskbar (proper noun) and the Widget (proper noun) in the help. I never used the widget until we started testing stuff. Now, my main system (T43) runs the Taskbar and my test system (T560) runs the widget, and I can check for consistent behavior between the two. I guess that's also what made me notice all the greyed options on the widget-installed system. The notebook just looks "odd" that way. > The Mouse action page maybe should be #3, so page #2 would be "Filters" > for both the PM popup and whatever taskbar is in use, but Mouse actions > for the taskbars belong in each taskbar tab IMHO -- don't they apply to > the taskbar/widget only, and not the popup? > Indeed, the mouse actions do pertain only to the Taskbar and Widget. Shouldn't Filters go to the Global tab? >> My suggestion is to rename this tab "List" and to change the title of the >> first page from "General" to "Appearance" > > I find "List" rather unintuitive. Couldn't we have the tab dynamically > named Taskbar/Widget depending on which one is used, just like some > settings are enabled or disabled (grayed out)? > Indeed, List was more illustrative than creative. LOL >> and splitting the page into two areas: >> >> Common >> >> 3D look >> Group items >> Icons only >> Maximum button width >> Auto hide delay >> >> Taskbar >> >> Enable >> Auto hide >> Allow resizing >> Auto resize >> Flat buttons >> Top of screen >> Bottom of screen >> Reduce desktop workarea >> > > I agree this would make clearer which settings apply to what taskbar. > However, in the same vein, perhaps the "TaskBar" group could only appear > in the dialog for the taskbar, and be absent from the dialog for the > widget, instead of just grayed out. > I like Gregg's proposal of simply presenting the relevant tab for the installed version. >> What is not mentioned in the ticket is that it would be more appropriate to >> reorder the tabs: >> >> List | Popup | Miscellaneous | About > > Why? The Popup is always active, while the taskbar can be disabled, like > the widget -- it won't be active unless you add it to some XCenter. > Hmmm... I hadn't thought of it that way. I tend to think of the Popup as being a convenience feature, alongside the "main" event (Taskbar or Widget). Ordering isn't a really big deal to me as compared to better labeling. >> Finally, and also not mentioned in the ticket, is that tabs with only a >> single >> page should not say "Page 1 of 1". In most notebooks, the page number is >> omitted. > > True. > >> This is all fit and finish stuff, of course, aside from the textual changes. > > Also true. > :-) -- Lewis