On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 14:46, Joaquin Cuenca Abela wrote: > Hi! > > --- Paolo Borelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > For adding a handler it looks good since you have to > > type the function > > name anyway, but have deleting as the only way for > > removing the handler > > is a bit weak... I's like to have a "remove handler" > > item in the popup > > menu. > > I don't understand your concern. Why is a bit weak to > remove the handler when you remove the name of the > handler? > > It seems quite natural to me. >
I find it natural too and I'm all for it, just I'd like it not to be the *only* way to remove a signal handler. Two reasons mainly: 1) discoverabilty: I expect that when you select a row to add an hadler, the "handler" cell switch immediatly to edit mode so that it's clear you should type the function name, but when you select a row which already has an handler name I'd expect it to simply be selected and to switch to edit mode only if you click again on the cell. 2) ease/rapidity of use: when you add a handler you have to type the function name anyway, but to remove one it would be nice to just have to click a button and/or press the DEL key instead of deleting the function name character by character. > We should anyway show the handler's names in the tree > view, maybe as Archit suggests making the signal's > name the parent of handler's names on the tree. > > Then we can have a "<Type your signal handler name>" > that will add a new handler when the user types the > name of the handler. Something like: > > Name Handler After > ======================================= > - Activate > |______ on_activate1 [x] > |______ on_activate2 [ ] > |______ <Type your ...> > + Realize > I generally like this solution too, note however that we end up with a three level tree, since signals are also grouped by class. That could make things slightly more painful. Maybe the nodes containg the signal name should be expanded by default. > The disavantage of this method is that you have to > expand the signal before being able to add a signal > handler. > > I also don't know if it has accesibility problems. > > I'll consult the usability folks on this issue. Agreed, some advice by the "experts£ would be great, especially because there aren't many examples of this kind of UI in gnome ciao paolo _______________________________________________ Glade-devel maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/glade-devel