[chandler-users] Semantics for deleting a recurring event are bad

Bill McIver Bill.McIver at nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
Thu Feb 26 03:46:03 PST 2009


Dear Chandler,

Thank you for your tool and efforts to improve it.

The semantics for deleting recurring events
are flawed or at least the application does not
provide adequate protections for users.

A reasonable user might assume that the event will
be deleted for dates going forward.

One loses history by having the event deleted backward.

The dialogue box is ambiguous as to the consequences of
deleting All Events, at  the very least it should clarify that
this goes backward.

Finally, the application does not seem to allow this
action to be undone. This violates a basic tenet of
usability.




WJM

-- 
William McIver, Jr, PhD (Bill)        
Senior Research Officer, National Research Council Canada
Adjunct Professor, University of New Brunswick
Bill.McIver at nrc-cnrc.gc.ca  / +1 (506) 444-0387



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/chandler-users/attachments/20090226/7c80f750/attachment.htm 


More information about the chandler-users mailing list