gtg-user team mailing list archive

[Bertrand Rousseau <bertrand.rousseau@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Lionel Dricot <ploum@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> First of all, I want to thank you all for your enthusiasm for the 0.1
> release and the tons of bug reports. It's really nice for us to feel
> part of a community.
>
> As there is now users for GTG (you), I can put them at work and ask them
> a few questions ;-)
>
>
> Some of you were concerned by the difference between "Dismiss" and
> "Delete" which, I agree, is not intuitive at all. Bertrand and I don't
> agree on how to handle that so maybe we can let the users speak.
>
>
> The goal :
>
> Since the begining, we wanted to have a "dismiss-like" button because,
> very often, you don't do a task but the task is not relevant anymore or
> has been done by someone else. It doesn't mean you want to remove the
> task. You just want to mark it as "not to be done anymore". That's why
> we have the dismiss button.
>
> The delete button is when you want to remove completely a task from the
> system.
>
>
> My personal vision :
>
> For me, delete should never be used except in some corner case when you
> entered a task by mistake, when there's privacy concern about keeping a
> specific task, stuffs like that. The only task I ever delete are test
> tasks or tasks entered twice by mistake.
>
> In this regard, I wanted to "hide" a bit more the delete button and to
> put it in a submenu beneath the dismiss task. I really believe that you
> should not see the delete button. For me, it's more a convenience
> function than a feature.
>
>
> Bertrand doesn't agree with me because, if I understand correctly, he
> said that Mark as done, dismiss and delete are conceptually on the same
> level. They are all "actions" on tasks and should be displayed in that
> way. (he will probably correct me on this. I'm not speaking for him, I'm
> explaining what I understood from his arguments)
>
> While I agree with the theory, I just don't care too much about
> theory ;-)
>
> Bertrand also told me that my vision of "delete" should not be enforced
> and that it's up to the user to choose his workflow. I agree with that
> but I think that hiding the delete is more "encouraging an intuitive way
> of using the software" than forcing the workflow.
>
> Bertrand, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I've summed our
> disagreement on that particular point.

Mostly so, yes. I don't believe saying "Mark as done, Dismiss and
Delete are actions concept and must be kept together" is more a theory
than "People should not use delete since it is a corner case". Both
are theories.

>
> So, what do you think ? How should those buttons be displayed ? Do you
> think it would make the interface easier and more intuitive to change
> the button ?
>
>
> Also, there was some proposition to change the "Dismiss" word. Maybe it
> could help, indeed, I personally never thought about that. What do you
> propose instead of "Dismiss" ?

My take on that is that we could change the concept of dismissall for
archiving. Archiving is a concept that GMail made popular. Next
version of Thunderbird mail will also implement this. I think this is
becoming a common action for workflow-related resources like emails or
tasks: you archive what you want to keep but is not relevant anymore
(but could be in the future). You delete what will not be needed
anymore.

>
> Thanks for reading and for your participation,
>
> Lionel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~gtg-user
> Post to     : gtg-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~gtg-user
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>



-- 
Bertrand Rousseau
Place communale 1, 1450 Chastre, Belgium
e-mail : bertrand.rousseau@xxxxxxxxx
tel : +32 485 96 69 86