Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!reed!chaffee
From: chaffee@reed.UUCP (Alex Chaffee)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: was: The Great Standard Yes/No/...
Summary: Ranting about modifier keys
Keywords: option key standards user interface rant
Message-ID: <13330@reed.UUCP>
Date: 20 Sep 89 00:08:34 GMT
References: <8909111739.AA10090@fs3.cs.rpi.edu> <15631@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <1684@draken.nada.kth.se> <11491@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Reply-To: chaffee@reed.UUCP (Alex Chaffee)
Organization: Reed College, Portland OR
Lines: 55

In article <11491@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM> dave@PRC.Unisys.COM (David Lee Matuszek) writes:
>I've never learned to do any of those things.  Whenever I need to
>rebuild the desktop, I have to look up the command sequence.
> [and other bad stuff about the combinatorial explosion of modifier keys]

I've always thought that whoever invented the "option" key actually thought
he ws doing a good thing.  "This way," (he thought), "programmers can make
buttons do different things without overly complicating the look & feel [his
terminology was ahead of his time] of the interface.  If a button (or
whatever) has two functions, the second will become active when the OPTION
key is down, 'cause it's an OPTION." (Choice -- option -- option key -- get
it?)

Unfortunately, he never wrote this down in the Interface Guidelines.
Programmers saw other programmers using this technique and (since they
lacked guidance) turned it into yet another Pandora's box from the likes of
which the UI Guidelines were supposed to liberate us.  "WHY," I often ask,
"did the programmer choose COMMAND-SHIFT (not to mention C-S-CLEAR-&c-&c)
rather than OPTION?"  If everything funky was done by ONE key, then I would
know how to get _any_ funky thing to happen -- and it would be STANDARD.
Instead, we learn once again that UNIX repeats itself.

Now, I know I'm just crying in the wilderness, that this malady will never
be cured -- but is there anyone out there who at least sees my point?
Oh, and just to remove some potential flames, of course I see cases where
just the option key wouldn't be enough, and we'd have to use Command or
Shift or Control... but _always_ as a second choice; the first option should
always be taken by the option key.

> ...
>2.  Require two modifier keys, e.g. shift-option, to minimize
>    the chances that someone will hit it by accident.

I am opposed to two or more modifier keys even more than I am opposed to
using keys other than option to modify the function of a button which could
be modified just as well by one key...  Just to eliminate the confusion of
"will it do the option thing AND the shift thing, or..."  (Actually, I
wouldn't _really_ mind multiple presses if they were standardized.)

Conversely, when you have your hand on the mouse, how often do you
accidentally press any key on the keyboard, let alone option? (Especially if
you know option has a reputation for making things 'funky'...)

> [ these combinations are never documented ]

Yeah; at least in UNIX you can always type "man"...

                "Nor is it a consequence of my bed's being covered with
                leaves that I am not hallucinating that it is."
	                - Barry Stroud
____________________
-- 
Alex Chaffee
chaffee@reed.UUCP
____________________