Dear Dillo developers, I just noticed a small misbehaviour when trying to close a Dillo window (using ALT+F4 or CTRL+q) with more than one tab open: A window pops up and asks wether I am sure to close. At this point I unfortunately can't use the ENTER key to confirm. I think I would be very convenient for the user to make the ENTER key work. Another question here: Please tell me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be no dillorc option to omit the mentioned popup window completely. Do you think it would be convenient to have one? Kind regards, Alexander
Alexander wrote:
I just noticed a small misbehaviour when trying to close a Dillo window (using ALT+F4 or CTRL+q) with more than one tab open: A window pops up and asks wether I am sure to close. At this point I unfortunately can't use the ENTER key to confirm. I think I would be very convenient for the user to make the ENTER key work.
fltk-1.3 is very into using Space to trigger buttons, and not Enter. I am accustomed to pressing Enter, so I would be happy to go through and make Enter work wherever it can be done without a lot of trouble. I mentioned the issue on the list a few months back, and no one had a word to say, but unless there's a lot of strenuous objection from the others for some reason, that's what I'll do.
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:25:43AM +0200, Alexander Voigt wrote: Dear Dillo developers,
I just noticed a small misbehaviour when trying to close a Dillo window (using ALT+F4 or CTRL+q) with more than one tab open: A window pops up and asks wether I am sure to close. At this point I unfortunately can't use the ENTER key to confirm. I think I would be very convenient for the user to make the ENTER key work.
spacebar. Ditto corvid, I'm prone to using enter/return as well.
Another question here: Please tell me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be no dillorc option to omit the mentioned popup window completely. Do you think it would be convenient to have one?
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit. -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org/
Roger wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:25:43AM +0200, Alexander Voigt wrote: Another question here: Please tell me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be no dillorc option to omit the mentioned popup window completely. Do you think it would be convenient to have one?
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:28:59PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:25:43AM +0200, Alexander Voigt wrote: Another question here: Please tell me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be no dillorc option to omit the mentioned popup window completely. Do you think it would be convenient to have one?
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and the default is safe (i.e. off). Cheers, Johannes
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and the default is safe (i.e. off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit. Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit. Also, few options under the File menu. Most times, I just halt -p. -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org/
Roger wrote:
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and the default is safe (i.e. off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit. Also, few options under the File menu. Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying that they don't need this dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 05:04:49AM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and the default is safe (i.e. off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit. Also, few options under the File menu. Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying that they don't need this dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it. Cheers, Johannes
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:20:29AM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 05:04:49AM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
you mean, "confirm to exit prompt". Ditto. Rarely, if ever accidentally quit.
I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and the default is safe (i.e. off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit. Also, few options under the File menu. Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying that they don't need this dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it.
Same for me. Now, if somebody wants to add a preference for that, could be, but the default should be to ask. -- Cheers Jorge.-
--- On Sat, 9/17/11, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 05:04:49AM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
> you mean, "confirm to exit
I wasn't sure what my opinion was
on this at first, but now I think an
option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and
(i.e.? off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit.? Also, few options under the File menu.? Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying
From: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev] Close dillo with multiple tabs open To: dillo-dev at dillo.org Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 12:09 PM On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:20:29AM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: prompt".? Ditto.? Rarely, if ever accidentally quit. the default is safe that they don't need this
dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it.
? Same for me.
? Now, if somebody wants to add a preference for that, could be, but the default should be to ask.
I see no harm in this: put in a default but make it configurable. While I don't have the urge to use ctrl-q much, I am still stumped why alt-q does not work now to close dillo, as I had conditioned myself to. i usually immediately rebound and go with the new action....
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:19:42AM -0700, Globe Trotter wrote:
--- On Sat, 9/17/11, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 05:04:49AM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
> > you mean, "confirm to exit
> > I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an > option sounds reasonable.
Why not, if there is demand for it and
(i.e.? off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit.? Also, few options under the File menu.? Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying
From: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev] Close dillo with multiple tabs open To: dillo-dev at dillo.org Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 12:09 PM On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:20:29AM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: prompt".? Ditto.? Rarely, if ever accidentally quit. the default is safe that they don't need this
dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it.
? Same for me.
? Now, if somebody wants to add a preference for that, could be, but the default should be to ask.
I see no harm in this: put in a default but make it configurable. While I don't have the urge to use ctrl-q much, I am still stumped why alt-q does not work now to close dillo, as I had conditioned myself to. i usually immediately rebound and go with the new action....
ctrl-q is considered more used across apps. (that made it the default) You can set alt-q in keysrc if you want. -- Cheers Jorge.-
--- On Sat, 9/17/11, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> wrote:
From: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev] Close dillo with multiple tabs open To: dillo-dev at dillo.org Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 3:56 PM On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:19:42AM -0700, Globe Trotter wrote:
--- On Sat, 9/17/11, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org>
wrote:
From: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev] Close dillo with
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 05:04:49AM +0000, corvid wrote:
Roger wrote:
>> > you mean, "confirm to exit
>> >> I wasn't sure what my opinion was on this at first, but now I think an >> option sounds reasonable. > >Why not, if there is demand for it and
>(i.e.? off).
Ditto. I've never accidentally quit.
Oh, I've used File > Quit once in a while, but with that many key sequences or clicks, it's tough to accidentally quit.? Also, few options under the File menu.? Most times, I just halt -p.
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying
To: dillo-dev at dillo.org Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 12:09 PM On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:20:29AM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: prompt".? Ditto.? Rarely, if ever accidentally quit. the default is safe that they don't need this
dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it.
? Same for me.
? Now, if somebody wants to add a preference for
multiple tabs open that,
could be, but the default should be to ask.
I see no harm in this: put in a default but make it configurable. ? While I don't have the urge to use ctrl-q much, I am still stumped why alt-q ? does? not work now to close dillo, as I had conditioned myself to. i usually immediately rebound and go with the new action....
? ctrl-q is considered more used across apps. (that made it the default)
? You can set alt-q in keysrc if you want.
Thanks, i was not complaining, just saying that my mind had become conditioned to using alt-q when exiting dillo (only)....
Safari has it and given the fact that we only recently switched from Ctrl-Q to Crtl-W for closing tabs, people might accidentally hit Ctrl-Q when they want to close just the tab. It happend to me at least. So for now I would keep it.
Elinks uses CTRL-C to close tabs. It's kind of tough to think CTRL-Q closes a tab to begin with. Mistake for "close qab" just doesn't sound right to begin with. However, if CTRL-C was mapped to quit, aka "close application", well that would be confusing. Or if "CTRL-Q" were on a keyboard layout next to the "CTRL-C" But still, ELinks does ask to quit before quiting. But this is because I keep typing ":q" (VIM quit), and 'q' is mapped to quit in ELinks. (But this is user error, as I start thinking I'm within VIM at times due to all the console text.) So, some good examples when there's no conflict, and some examples where there is a conflict. Really, when asking, you're just trying to prevent user error. However, how would you like a prompt on your vehicle every time you pressed the brakes? Do you really want to stop? Or, how about every time you start your vehicle and you're within an emergency situation and get, "Do you really want to start your car?" With real world applications, security of preventing accidental quitting is application response to users intentions. <shrugs> I'm sure this has been debated quite a bit, and with Windows, I get so many prompts that I become non-productive & frustrated. -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org/
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:08:52 -0400, Roger <rogerx.oss at gmail.com> wrote:
However, how would you like a prompt on your vehicle every time you pressed the brakes? Do you really want to stop? Or, how about every time you start your vehicle and you're within an emergency situation and get, "Do you really want to start your car?" With real world applications, security of preventing accidental quitting is application response to users intentions.
I don't know much about cars, but I do know it's pretty hard to accidentally start one. And computers are, in terms of physical interactions, much more difficult to use than most real-world objects (and less predictable, as well). That's why usability is so tricky to get right, and why most programs' interfaces tend to follow established standards and conventions. By the way, it's worth noting that vim prompts you to prevent accidental quitting, BSD vi prompts you to prevent accidental quitting, even freaking *ed* prompts you to prevent accidental quitting. I find it pretty annoying sometimes, too, but there have been many times when that prompt has saved me from far greater frustration. ~Benjamin
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 06:00:35PM -0400, Benjamin Johnson wrote: On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:08:52 -0400, Roger <rogerx.oss at gmail.com> wrote:
However, how would you like a prompt on your vehicle every time you pressed the brakes? Do you really want to stop? Or, how about every time you start your vehicle and you're within an emergency situation and get, "Do you really want to start your car?" With real world applications, security of preventing accidental quitting is application response to users intentions.
I don't know much about cars, but I do know it's pretty hard to accidentally start one. And computers are, in terms of physical interactions, much more difficult to use than most real-world objects (and less predictable, as well). That's why usability is so tricky to get right, and why most programs' interfaces tend to follow established standards and conventions.
By the way, it's worth noting that vim prompts you to prevent accidental quitting, BSD vi prompts you to prevent accidental quitting, even freaking *ed* prompts you to prevent accidental quitting. I find it pretty annoying sometimes, too, but there have been many times when that prompt has saved me from far greater frustration.
You answered this one yourself. The default option for VIM on quit, is to only ask if it should quit when the file in the buffer has been modified. Other then this, if the file buffer is unmodified, no prompt before quitting is issued. As such, should a browser do the same; only when forms or HTML composer/editor has a current editing session, or associated email composition has been edited, should a browser ask when to quit? The only thing likely editable within Dillo are bookmarks and some forms. When you think about it, all data being viewed within the browser is static to it's original location. The only information lost is the original entered URL, which usually can be found via Google, hence, no information is at threat of being lost. -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org/
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 13:05:31 -0400, Roger <rogerx.oss at gmail.com> wrote:
You answered this one yourself. The default option for VIM on quit, is to only ask if it should quit when the file in the buffer has been modified. Other then this, if the file buffer is unmodified, no prompt before quitting is issued.
As such, should a browser do the same; only when forms or HTML composer/editor has a current editing session, or associated email composition has been edited, should a browser ask when to quit? The only thing likely editable within Dillo are bookmarks and some forms.
When you think about it, all data being viewed within the browser is static to it's original location. The only information lost is the original entered URL, which usually can be found via Google, hence, no information is at threat of being lost.
I beg to differ; it's no longer 1994, and a good bit of the web -- in fact, I'd dare say most of it -- is no longer static content. In the absence of anything to indicate otherwise, it's better to assume *all* information displayed in a browser could potentially be lost. A couple weeks ago, one of my professors had to take an online exam for certification. Her printer was out, so she had to send it through the department printer. Long story short, somehow the print job got lost in transmission. She'd already closed the browser, and it didn't save her session, so she had to take the entire 4+ hour exam again. Bear in mind, the page she was trying to print -- and subsequently closed out of -- didn't have any HTML forms. Basically it was just an image and some text to say she had successfully completed the exam. Granted, it was *generated* from form data, but it was not itself a "current editing session". Even if you're just viewing static HTML pages, a browser session is not *itself* a static thing: it is the unique result of a long chain of user interactions. If you close a text editor, all you lose is a single file, which is very easy to re-open. If you close a browser, you lose not only the open pages, but also their history, and for dynamic pages, the interactions and form posts that generated them -- in short, the pages' context. And that's much more difficult to recover, even in the most sophisticated modern browsers. In short, the *data* may be static, but the larger browser session is not. Don't confuse the two. ~Benjamin
Benjamin Johnson (2011-09-18 13:33): <...>
Even if you're just viewing static HTML pages, a browser session is not *itself* a static thing: it is the unique result of a long chain of user interactions. If you close a text editor, all you lose is a single file, which is very easy to re-open. If you close a browser, you lose not only the open pages, but also their history, and for dynamic pages, the interactions and form posts that generated them -- in short, the pages' context. And that's much more difficult to recover, even in the most sophisticated modern browsers.
Add the scrolling position to this list, which applies to both, long text files and long HTML pages :) -- -- Rogut?s Sparnuotos
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 01:04:49 -0400, corvid <corvid at lavabit.com> wrote:
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying that they don't need this dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Of course, Firefox has the ability to restore the last open session when it starts up; accidentally quitting isn't so bad when you can just restart and resume where you left off. (Out of curiosity, does it do that by default?) Speaking of restoring sessions, one of my own users had the very clever idea to implement that feature using bookmarks -- save all the open tabs in a certain bookmarks section, then load all the bookmarks in that section on startup. I haven't coded it yet, but I wanted to share since it was such a neat solution to that problem. Cheers, ~Benjamin
Benjamin Johnson (2011-09-17 10:14):
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 01:04:49 -0400, corvid <corvid at lavabit.com> wrote:
Just occurred to me that everyone's been saying that they don't need this dialog box. I checked firefox and it doesn't warn when quitting. Maybe we don't need it at all.
Of course, Firefox has the ability to restore the last open session when it starts up; accidentally quitting isn't so bad when you can just restart and resume where you left off. (Out of curiosity, does it do that by default?)
I think Firefox asks how it should behave regarding sessions when quiting for the first time.
Speaking of restoring sessions, one of my own users had the very clever idea to implement that feature using bookmarks -- save all the open tabs in a certain bookmarks section, then load all the bookmarks in that section on startup. I haven't coded it yet, but I wanted to share since it was such a neat solution to that problem.
I guess this would be much better than nothing, and separate sessions could use separate bookmark sections (controlled by a command line parameter or dialogs)... Though one gets spoiled by the ones like Firefox, that take the pain of restoring POST data, this approach is not bulletproof and perhaps for dillo it would suffice to restore a simple URL list into tabs. -- -- Rogut?s Sparnuotos
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 12:45:29 -0400, Rogut?s Sparnuotos <rogutes at googlemail.com> wrote:
Benjamin Johnson (2011-09-17 10:14):
Speaking of restoring sessions, one of my own users had the very clever idea to implement that feature using bookmarks -- save all the open tabs in a certain bookmarks section, then load all the bookmarks in that section on startup. I haven't coded it yet, but I wanted to share since it was such a neat solution to that problem.
I guess this would be much better than nothing, and separate sessions could use separate bookmark sections (controlled by a command line parameter or dialogs)... Though one gets spoiled by the ones like Firefox, that take the pain of restoring POST data, this approach is not bulletproof and perhaps for dillo it would suffice to restore a simple URL list into tabs.
I should note that this suggestion was for Dillo-Win32, which has the bookmarks code built into the browser (and already supports loading an entire bookmarks section in tabs). So it's quite practical there, since it's just reusing existing code. I doubt the bookmarks approach would work as well in mainline, since it would have to run everything through the DPI, and that code's already complicated enough as it is. But at least the DPI can easily be modified to store bookmarks in a database, for the rare user who has a running MySQL server but lacks the CPU power for Firefox. ;-) ~Benjamin
participants (8)
-
corvid＠lavabit.com -
Hole.destructor＠gmx.de -
itsme_410＠yahoo.com -
jcid＠dillo.org -
Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de -
obeythepenguin＠gmail.com -
rogerx.oss＠gmail.com -
rogutes＠googlemail.com