In a recent note, Walt Farrell said: > Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 12:13:02 -0500 > > On 3/5/2007 12:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > > ... But in SDSF "SJ" while > > EDITSET shows "Confirm Cancel" as disabled, SDSF still asks me > > to confirm Cancel. > > > > ISPF really needs to get its act together. > > I would say that ISPF does have its act together, gil. It allows > Not in my perception. You're showing an unseemly excess of employee loyalty.
> applications to run with different application prefixes, settings, > variable pools, and commands. You've described one of the effects of > that flexibility. > > SDSF runs with a different application profile (ISF) than PDF does > (ISR). Thus the commands available are different, the settings are > maintained separately, etc. > > You need to do the EDITSET (or any other action that sets profile > variables) once for each different ISPF application you're using. > Do you, then, consider it correct, or a manifestation of "flexibility" that EDITSET under SDSF displays "Confirm Cancel" as disabled, yet the Cancel command itself still requests confirmation? And "flexibility" can be a PITA when there's no global default setting and the customer is required to do the profile setting for each application, and suffers a high astonishment factor when entering a seldom-used applicaton and encountering a deviation from behavior that had generally been observed to be uniform and stable. Is there a way to make such settings globally rather than locally? It would be great to have a checkbox that says "Apply these settings to all applications." -- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
