[Sugar-devel] RFC: Kill the delayed menus for good

[C. Scott Ananian]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Wade Brainerd <wadetb at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I'd like to put my designer hat on for a minute and offer an alternative
>> > to
>> > Bernie/Michael's patch and the current behavior:  Any time the mouse
>> > hovers
>> > over a part of the screen with a delayed action, that part must
>> > immediately
>> > highlight itself.  With the frame, that would be a 1px rectangle around
>> > the
>> > screen.  With icons, this could be a border rectangle.

> An even nicer option might be to expand "highlight itself" to "hint at what
> it's going to do".
> For example, an icon with a delayed menu could highlight itself and display
> a little down arrow (similar to the arrows in the new toolbars).
> With feedback/mockups from the design team I'd be happy to attempt this
> patch.

I agree with Wade here -- I think the problem is not the delayed menus
themselves, but that kids are not *discovering* that right-click can
eliminate the delay.  How are they supposed to discover that?  Perhaps
some thought along those lines would help.

I myself found that I often waited for the delayed menu, even though I
knew about right-click, because it was "easier".  That seems to be my
choice and preference, not a priori a bad thing (even though an
observer might think it a flaw).  I think that I did this less often
when the delay was increased, but now we're relying on imperfect
memory.

Of course, seeing a small child start to swear is a good indication
that the user is frustrated and has not discovered any means to
resolve their frustration.  (Even a "complexity slider" has to be
discoverable!)
 --scott

ps. I've found the discussion of ideas here much more interesting than
the finger-pointing.  Attempts to shift responsibility (it's my patch,
YOU have to prove that it's wrong -vs- it's my design, YOU have to
prove that it's wrong) are productive/necessary to some degree, but a
family matter you guys should take out back somewhere to hash out.  We
all should (IMHO) be listening much more to Daniel Drake, who seems to
have the most practical experience guiding his intuitions.  (Caroline,
too, but I haven't her offer as specific an opinion on the issue.)

pps. Perhaps this thread should have been started as a discussion of
design (with working code to demonstrate), not as, "here's a patch,
now if you value contributors you should apply it".

-- 
                         ( http://cscott.net/ )