Re: lynx-dev "sticky" things

[Klaus Weide]

On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
> > I suggest to change some details:
> > On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> > 
> > > CONFIRM_TEXTFIELD_PREV_DOC:NEVER|IFEDITED|ALWAYS
> > >
> > >  If value is NEVER, PREV_DOC_QUERY will be never asked,
> > >            IFEDITED - old behaviour
> > >              ALWAYS - ask always.

I have an addition to propose:  IF_NOT_EMPTY.
If the field is completely empty, the Left Arrow keystroke was most likely
not meant for moving around within the field.  (It wouldn't make sense.)
Most fields in pages are not pre-filled with anything (in my experience),
so they wouldn't "trap" unless one had started to edit.
If the field is empty, there is no edited data to lose (in this field anyway).
It seems to be a better heuristic than the one used now (IFCHANGED /
IFEDITED).  It protects against more cases of accidental leaving.

Does it make sense?

> > PREV_DOC instead of LEAVE_DOC - well, it's already the name of the key
> >                                 action
> 
>   IMO such name collision is unimportant and shouldn't scare. And I find the
> name I suggested -  CONFIRM_LEAVE_DOC_IN_TEXTFIELD - to be more descriptive to
> russian-speaking users at least :)

I strongly prefer *_PREV_DOC_* over *_LEAVE_DOC_*.  Or propose to
rename the PREV_DOC key to the LEAVE_DOC key, too.

Ignore all my other changes as you prefer, but consistency should have
some value.

> > no IFFORMCHANGED - that would seem to indicate that we check whether
> >                    the form as a whole (any field) changed.
> 
>   I have a feeling that you don't wish to write the function that checks
> whether the form has changed - am I right? Seems such function is already 
> present: GridText.c:HText_HaveUserChangedForms. What do you think about it?

Hmm, feature "bloat"?  or "feature creep"? :)

I don't know whether it would be useful.  Maybe it is.

But that function checks *all* form fields in the current page.  So
it should be IFFORM*S*CHANGED.

> > IFEDITED (or IF_EDITED?) - maybe.  to not give the impression that
> >                            a different kind of change has something to
> >                            do with it?  Or leave as IF(_)CHANGED.
> 
>   I don't understand your comment about IFEDITED.

I was thinking about a Reset action for example, which does a
"change" that consist of changing back to the "unchanged" value.
But nevermind.

   Klasu