Moveable Modal and a different kind of 'Modal' form
When one form in an application is modal: you can't *move* the underlying forms around. This is a shame -- because often you need to see something in an underlying form, to help you decide what to enter into the current form. It's okay that you can't interact with the client area of the underlying forms... but it would be good if you could move the underlying forms around. It's a tricky problem though: it would be hard to let you move one of those non-modal forms around without giving them focus... The top-most modal form would need to be 'always on top' for the application, so that while moving underlying forms around, you can't "lose" the form you are supposed to be working on. Anyway. That is my feature request for today. And here's another idea that i had about modal forms...
There is such a thing as 'modal for the application' -- meaning that 'of all the forms in this application, the modal one will have focus'.
And there is the rather brutal concept of 'modal for the system' meaning that nothing else can be done on that machine until this form is taken care of.
What about: "Modal for the organisation" meaning that every machine in a company is locked until that one form has been taken care of. The form might appear on everyone's machine, or just on one person's machine. I haven't figured out the specifics. I is just ideas rat.
And of course there should be "Modal for the internet" meaning that nothing can occur on the entire internet until a particular question has been answered.
And finally, "universal modal" -- meaning that the entire universe is frozen at absolute zero with not a single molecule so much as jiggling, until a particular form has been taken care of.
(Note this shouldn't be the default behaviour for many application)
(Also, this reminds me of a quote from (Leo Tolstoy? Henry Miller?) -- "We have not yet decided the question of the existence of god, and you wish to eat!?")
'SimonH' on Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:10:07 GMT, sez: 'And finally, "universal modal" -- meaning that the entire universe is frozen at absolute zero with not a single molecule so much as jiggling, until a particular form has been taken care of.'
Can you imagine the chaos (um, stasis, maybe) caused by one of these in an infinite loop? Think of the children!
This is thinly veiled cyber-terrorism; you should be ashamed.
'Wesley Shephard' on Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:52:12 GMT, sez: Modal dialogs are *so easy* to write, but really don't serve the user. In addition to the problem you cite, there is the "grab the focus and take your touch typing as input" aspect that drives me insane.
I don't know how many dialogs I have "confirmed" (well, maybe confirmed, maybe it was declined... there is no way to know) by accident because of a modal dialog jumping up and deciding it was more important than the sentence I was typing.
In my applications I always try to open new windows *only* in direct response to a click event (or a keyboard event specifically equivalent, such as an ALT-keystroke).
To do the notifications needed, I created a notification area in the status bar which blinks and contains relevant information about any notices. Clicking it brings up the notifications that have queued.
This means that instead of "Do you really want the commitment of saving this data?" messages, I provide a history that allows records to be rolled back to prior states. Instead of "OMG, Ponies" popups when something happens, they go to the notification bar. Just a bit more effort, and modal dialogs can become a thing of the past. Like text mode applications.
'Martin Marconcini' on Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:47:48 GMT, sez: Mac OS X has a different approach, if you Command-Click a form that is behind another, you can move it around, without losing the current focus; this is very handy. I have seen Windows OS application stealing focus more often than OS X counterparts, however under Apple's operating system, *sometimes* that annoying focus steal will happen. Guess no one is perfect tho. ;)
There could be a "Modal for the Modal", where both modal forms fight in some kind of "Arena of the Modal Forms" or a dirty fight. Winner form gets the focus.
'chk' on Mon, 16 Oct 2006 05:35:27 GMT, sez: Have you ever thought of moving the modal form around to see the underlying data? ;-)
Often that helps.
Ch,
'lb' on Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:19:02 GMT, sez: >moving the modal form around to see the underlying data
yeh, i should probably clarify that there are situations where the underlying forms obscure each other -- and moving the modal form around isn't good enough.
'Carl' on Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:45:20 GMT, sez: "And finally, "universal modal" -- meaning that the entire universe is frozen at absolute zero with not a single molecule so much as jiggling, until a particular form has been taken care of."
I hate to inform you that this idea is severely flawed...
If not a single molecule is allowed to jiggle, how is the intended recipient of said modal dialog intended to deal with it?
I think that what you probably intended is that every molecule except for those making up this 'intended recipient' and his/her 'Sphere of Influence'.
Unfortunately, as is generally the case in these universal modal dialog situations, this user could possibly have just nipped to the toilet, or even worse, died...
Lol, I have images of sitting on the loo the lights dimming and a large, Trapdoor-esque voice booming out to inform me that I must attend to a universal modal dialog box..
;o)
'lb' on Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:55:33 GMT, sez: >I think that what you probably intended is
>that every molecule except for those
>making up this 'intended recipient' and
>his/her 'Sphere of Influence'.
yep that's what i meant. I've investigated the physics behind this thoroughly and it turns out that yeh -- what you said. that's it.
|