Re: Standard Middle-Click Functionality

> > In general, I think that all options should be configurable, but I am
> > talking mostly about the default.
>
>Excessive configurability is a sign of poor user-interface design.
>
>Its also a sure road to chaos. Imagine the FAQ:

Yes, quite right. Allow me to shift/clarify my position slightly.

None of the options should be hard-coded. KDE should have a system (possibly 
even an interface) for configuring such options. This would be there so that 
distros could customize their interfaces to behave in one manner, 
consistently. The issue being because of accessibility issues, and interface 
issues. For example, what if a distro wants to support a mouseless system? 
Sounds a little silly, but why not? And what about someone wanting to only 
use a touch-screen? No mouse-buttons, but very powerful if set-up right.

The point is, the responsibility for such a thing should be on the distro's 
shoudlers. KDE should have good defaults, but the ability to have them 
changed. However, such options should not be in the 'configuration' menus.

>"Q: How do I print?"
>
>"A: How should we know? There will be some arbitrary key combination,
>menu item, or toolbar icon that will probably print if you use it. You,
>or your sys admin, or your little brother, or the vendor who supplied
>your system, could have set it to anything. Good luck, and when you
>work out what it is, don't bother telling anyone, because everyone
>else's system will be different."

Then, it's:

"Q: How do I print?"

"A: Press ctrl-P. If this does not work, check with your specific 
distribution."

Okay, so it'd still be more hassle than that, but it needs to be 
non-hard-coded despite that.

_________________________________________________________________
Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE!  
http://msnmessenger-download.com