[linux-audio-dev] mouse wheel behavior and RFC: human interface guidelines

[John Check]

On Saturday 21 August 2004 05:47 pm, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 17:31, John Check wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 August 2004 04:51 pm, Lee Revell wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 16:36, John Check wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 21 August 2004 04:24 pm, Lee Revell wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 16:14, John Check wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday 21 August 2004 02:10 pm, Pete Bessman wrote:
> > > > > > > I guarantee you that the last thing on 99.8% of users' minds
> > > > > > > when they're adjusting a horizontal volume slider is "This is
> > > > > > > kind of like reading a book, which goes left to right and top
> > > > > > > to bottom; and if we assume an association between beginnings
> > > > > > > and ends, then it follows that left and up are vaguely
> > > > > > > synonymous.  Therefore, to decrease the volume with my
> > > > > > > mousewheel, I MUST spin up."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nope, they try one way, then the other, then make a mental note
> > > > > > if it doesn't fit the expectation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which is why is HAS to work the same way in every app.  You can't
> > > > > expect users to make mental notes of differences like this from app
> > > > > to app.
> > > >
> > > > I agree, but I think "should" is a more realistic position than "has
> > > > to".
> > >
> > > Sorry, I disagree.  This kind of thing is MADDENING for users and makes
> > > Linux look fly-by-night.
> >
> > That presumes we have a monopoly on inconsistency. ;)
> > Having a consistent interface will definitely work to our advantage, but
> > I'm talking about near term when I say things like that. Being as I'm not
> > going to be the one coding, I can't say "must" or "has to".
>
> It's easy enough (well it should be, I would imagine you can set this
> behavior when you create a GTK slider, if not then it's a completely
> reasonable feature request) for a coder to fix that I think we can
> safely say it must work a certain way (in order to meet the Linux Audio
> HIG that I guess I am proposing).
>
> Right now, I would have the HIG state that this behavior must be
> globally configurable.  Globally for the sake of the above mentioned
> consistency, and configurable because obviously one way is intuitive to
> some people, and the other way to others.
>

Sounds reasonable to me.

> > > Of course, you can't force people to follow human interface guidelines
> > > in the free software world.  All we can do is carefully develop them
> > > based on what users want, then if you choose not to comply you are
> > > explicitly stating that you are hubristically choosing to ignore the
> > > users need for a consistent experience.
> >
> > And in that case one gets what one deserves. From what I can see so far
> > WRT proprietary stuff, there are a lot of little annoyances that add up
> > to a lot of opportunity for LA.
>
> Yes, see above.  The list of annoyances people have with the 'state of
> the art' in proprietary software is a major motivating factor for many
> Linux audio developers.  It should be the same way for users, but we are
> not there yet.
>
> Lee
>
> Lee