From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 31296 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2022 15:54:09 -0000
Received: from 9front.inri.net (168.235.81.73)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 18 Aug 2022 15:54:09 -0000
Received: from mail.9lab.org ([168.119.8.41]) by 9front; Thu Aug 18 11:52:37 -0400 2022
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=9lab.org; s=20210803;
	t=1660837951;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:  in-reply-to:in-reply-to;
	bh=K+sYn1+u6BlKK2KlVSzcli1aYWhrivx2d4ok/j7ib5I=;
	b=EgVck3Rg7JOn3WLFOzUH2wPaE2lLV5Xj1erc8blnrDpIXevhlP4sMHQVkswDCT+IAumgsa
	I/8ffi6vDDxnfrwTKaVI6Mu90S5J5Jolvh0aRikLMxQT5lEPwD3Z2wLbxaLaxOPwf3BApf
	edTj3YHC5T3B+RIy7kZd6kGFoQF49KM=
Received: from rob.9lab.home (host-185-64-155-70.ecsnet.at [185.64.155.70])
	by mail.9lab.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id e41f203a (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305:256:NO)
	for <9front@9front.org>;
	Thu, 18 Aug 2022 17:52:30 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <629C899644486EAE2F3FB802D33921EC@9lab.org>
To: 9front@9front.org
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 17:52:29 +0200
From: igor@9lab.org
In-Reply-To: <59E49EBC-5853-4BBD-A67D-EB772CE0ECAE@stanleylieber.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: social shared configuration database 
Subject: Re: [9front] dangerous Exit menu item in sub-rio
Reply-To: 9front@9front.org
Precedence: bulk

Quoth Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com>:
> what if the gray background is completely covered up?

Maybe I am doing something wrong but if the gray background
is completely covered I can not even bring the rio menu
that allows me to say `New`, `Delete`, etc.

Even if there is a way to bring up the menu when the
grey is covered up, isn't this similar to the case where
the window you want to `Delete` is hidden?

In that case you would bring the window to the front,
select `Delete`, and then select the window you just
brought to the front for deletion.

When the sub-rio you want to `Delete` isn't visible
because it is covered up, you need to make it visible,
select `Delete`, and then select the gray of the sub
rio.

That being said, I think there is agreement that the
process of Exit from a sub-rio should be a two step
process. Either select Exit and Confirm, or use the
semantics with `Delete` where the second step is selecting
the gray from the sub-rio as the target of the `Delete,
obviating the need for an additional menu entry.

My personal taste is for `Delete`, but the other options
is just as workable, no complaints.


> 
> maybe exit could imitate delete and just require a second click (but this time, click anywhere and the current rio dies). we don’t have to call it a confirmation, we can pretend we’re a hunter targeting our prey. we could even borrow the skull and crossbones icon from mothra. maybe this would disturb the cognitive load just enough to be effective?
> 
> sl
> 
> 
> > On Aug 18, 2022, at 9:51 AM, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> > 
> > Quoth igor@9lab.org:
> >> 
> >> Why does `Delete` not apply to a sub-rio, i.e., why does selecting
> >> `Delete` and then clicking on the gray background of sub-rio not close
> >> the sub-rio?  That way it would remain a two-step process and there
> >> is no need to add another menu option.
> > 
> > I think I like that.
> > 
> > 
>