On 2 July 2012 22:18, Allan Day <allanp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Adam, > > Thanks for your responses. Comments inline... > > Adam Dingle <a...@yorba.org> wrote: >>>* Horizontal scrolling is unergonomic with mouse and touchpad input >> >> It's true that the mouse scroll wheel moves vertically and compact view >> scrolls horizontally, but that takes only a moment to get used to. I see no >> reason why scrolling on a touchpad would be any more natural vertically than >> horizontally. > > The problem is the way fingers and wrists work. :) The human hand is > not well suited to horizontal movement with a mouse/touchpad (unless > you're using a scroll wheel).
I think you got this backwards. When you rest a human hand on a desk it is expressly suited for horizontal left/right movements, and *not* very well suited to move vertically up/down. For horizontal movement you use your wrist as a pivot point giving you very precise and flexible movements. SNIP >> To me, the compact view is essential because it's our only view which >> displays files in a layout where filenames have significantly greater >> density than icons. This is important in the (extremely common) case where >> you're looking at a large number of files in a directory and care more about >> the names than about the icons. List view is inappropriate for this use >> case because it shows too much detail about each file. To put it simply, >> compact view is like 'ls' and list view is like 'ls -l'. > > I think there are a lot of ways that list view can be improved to fit > these requirements. Jon has already gone some way towards making the > noise level lower by sanitising the date formats. Another thing we can > do is (which I think he's going to look at) is improve zooming so that > you can have the icons become less significant in comparison to the > text. > > In general, I much prefer this approach of concentrating on one or two > views and putting effort into making them work really well. And if > we're improving the defaults, then the maximum number of users benefit > from that work. Tighter focus in the user experience is a commendable goal. I can only support that. However, as software development usually goes, important features are not removed before you have something to fill the void. If there is a suitable replacement for a feature it makes good sense to remove it. In this case I don't see a suitable replacement. Yet. So my plea is to remove it when you have an actual codified solution. Not at this point where the solution is still just talkware. Cheers, Mikkel -- nautilus-list mailing list nautilus-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list