On 1 Jan 2011, at 10:19, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> A better solution would be to modify the GUI code so we had an actual
> close button. I haven't looked to see how difficult that would be.
Based on writing some rather complex custom widgets for PUI, I'd say that
adding a custom close button sho
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> How about adding
> X
> to the small close button?
I've tried that, but unfortunately the X isn't quite centered in the
box, and looks very much like the character "X" rather than a cross.
A better solution would be to modify the GUI code
How about adding
X
to the small close button?
Torsten
--
Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers
to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and,
should
For newcomers I'd say it is essential that there are close buttons. When
new users try out software they won't browse any documentation. And I'd
say that many (most?) users would get confused without close buttons.
This seems to be an important non-issue. Maybe there already is an
expert option
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> (Why) do we need two buttons to close a dialog? I recently removed the ones
> that say "Close" on most
> dialogs, replacing them with small buttons in the top right corner. There
> are quite some dialogs that don't
> have a "normal" close butto
I'd like to back Gijs up here. I've worked in usability studies, and
these things make a difference in the user's experience. Minimizing
clicking and placing buttons in consistent locations makes for a
considerably more pleasant experience.
-Gary, aka Buckaroo
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Gi
Hi
> Stuart wrote:
>
> - a close button on the top right
> - at minimum a "Close" button at the bottom of the dialog
(Why) do we need two buttons to close a dialog? I recently removed the ones
that say "Close" on most
dialogs, replacing them with small buttons in the top right corner. There ar
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
>> Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to
>> capitilise each single word.
>> Why isn't it "Traffic options", or "Tanker controls"? I know it's not a big
>> d
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to
> capitilise each single word.
> Why isn't it "Traffic options", or "Tanker controls"? I know it's not a big
> deal, but to me it looks
> cleaner and clearer...
As Jacob poi
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to
> capitilise each single word.
> Why isn't it "Traffic options", or "Tanker controls"? I know it's not a big
> deal, but to me it looks
> cleaner and clearer...
>
> If we cha
> I've been updating The Manual for the upcoming release, including
> updating the command reference to include the changes to the menus.
Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to capitilise
each single word.
Why isn't it "Traffic options", or "Tanker controls"? I kn
Hi Guys,
I've been updating The Manual for the upcoming release, including
updating the command reference to include the changes to the menus. I
came across a couple of menus which seemed mis-named, and for which
I've just committed some changes.
Specifically:
1) The AI menu had "AI" prefixed on
12 matches
Mail list logo
