[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev "sticky" things

From: mattack
Subject: Re: lynx-dev "sticky" things
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 01:40:26 -0700 (PDT)

On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
>Ok, I dare you to find *one* user (other than you) who finds the
>current STICKY_FIELDS:FALSE is an improvement over STICKY_FIELDS:TRUE
>and would actually use it.
>Let's review what this is about.  In all cases, assume a text input
>form field field is current, and cursor is in the first position
>within.  (and no sticky-of-the-first-kind in effect).
>User presses Left Arrow.
>Old: two possibilities:
>    a) Lynx does PREV_DOC
>    b) Lynx asks user "Do you want to go back to the previous document?"
>       and then acts according to answer.
>Which of a) or b) applies depends on whether the text in the input
>field has been edited "just now".
>"Vlad's new behavior which he calls STICKY_FIELDS:FALSE":
>    c) Lynx ignores the Left Arrow key without any feedback.
>Always. (if it's enabled.)  (If I misunderstand, correct me.)

Except for the "without any feedback" part, I can say I'd prefer this method.
I would want a status line message saying something like:
To go back from within a text field, type ^V-leftarrow, or exit the field and
then type left-arrow.

Heck, I think this should be the default.  I surmise new users are confused
as hell by accidentally left-arrowing their way back many pages when they're
just trying to edit some text.  I don't think they want (and I know I don't
want) the equivalent of "modal dialogs" coming up and requiring me to answer.
The status line message gives useful info to those who need it, and those who
don't probably already have -nopause on.

Having to type ^V-leftarrow is vaguely equivalent to having to type command-
leftarrow in a GUI browser (or alt-leftarrow or whatever IBM ones use). You
make the common thing easy, and the less common thing slightly more tedious.

>It would be so trivial to just always issue the prompt.  The code
>for the prompt is already there.  But no, instead we got something
>more useless AND more complex.  A "patch that will *prevent* returning
>to the previous[...]" (my emphasis), rather than a patch that would
>help avoiding *accidentally* returning.

So are you saying ^V-leftarrow won't work in this situation?

>I just can't imagine that anyone wants Left-Arrow-does-nothing-whatsoever
>behavior.  I can't imagine why Vlad would want that either, but I guess
>I have to take that as a given.

Well, if I ever get a version of Lynx compiled with it in, I'll turn it on.

>  # STICKY_INPUTS - Input
>  # This option controls whether all text inputs are sticky.  If input is not
>  # sticky, then it won't intercept any keyboard input until user activates it
>  # (as usual link).

Uggh, that's just the way w3m does it.  Yuuuck.

>I objected to the "sticky" terminology when you first introduced it,
>in the very first response to your "non-sticky of the 1st kind" patch:
><>.  It is
>an awful name, I don't find it is a good description to call lynx's
>normal behavior "sticky".  I suggested some other names, there was

It's not really sticky, it's modal.  But I can understand from context why
it's called sticky.

>So I ask you, unless other folks say that things are fine as they are, to
>  Please get rid of the "sticky" terminology.  Find something better.
>  Please either get rid of your sticky-of-the-2nd-kind option
>  altogether or make it do something more useful.

No, the don't-go-back and also don't-prompt-me option is useful (with the
addition of a helpful message as described above).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]