[Pan-users] Re: Modal "Next" and "Back" buttons?

[Duncan]

"Charles Kerr" <address@hidden> posted
address@hidden, excerpted
below, on  Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:49:17 -0500:

> The "Unread" checkbox being checked means that Next/Prev would
> go to the next or previous article.
> 
> Maybe it would be clearer if the menu buttons used elipses
> to join the actions and the modifiers:
> 
>         Read More (space)
>         Read Less (backspace)
>     -------------------------------
>         Next Unread Group (G)
>         Next Group (shift-G)
>     -------------------------------
>         Next Article ... (N)
>         Prev Article ... (V)
>         Next Thread ... (t)
>         Prev Thread ... (?)
>     [x] ... which is Cached (c)
>     [x] ... which is Unread (u)
>     [x] ... which is Watched (w)
>     [x] ... which is a Reply to Me (m)
>     -------------------------------
>         Parent Article (ctrl-u)

I like this display variant.  It's a bit more intuitive than the first one.

The method in general fits in with the UI methods pan already uses, and of
course fit's in with my "power user" view of maximum user control
over behavior. =8^)

I can envision reviewers pointing it out however, as slightly confusing,
since it's not the typical way things would be handled.  I don't consider
that a negative since it's pretty self-evident once one looks at it, and
in fact love the extra power it gives me, but some might think it a
negative.

I'm not sure what you mean with those small letters, tho, in contrast to
the caps above and now used.  If you were intending to use W to toggle
watched, that's going to conflict with body pane Wrap, which uses that key
now.  Same with M for me vs mark-read, and C for cached vs. mono-space
toggle.  (Or did you mean to indicate by the small letters that those are
only menu-local accels, underlined letter, valid only when the menu is
open?)

Others likely use pan differently, but here anyway, all those toggles
would normally be set to what I want and forget.  I wouldn't be constantly
toggling them, so they don't need accels.  If I need the function for
something special, I'll access it from the menu, as I'd not remember the
accel for it if there was one since I don't use it enough to remember it. 
Unless a large group /would/ be toggling those, I'd therefore say just
leave them without mapped accels, and let those who use them enough to
want an accel use accel customization to get it.  That's one of the reasons
I love having it back, after all.  =8^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman