[Dev] Engineering feedback on item deletion and removal

[John Anderson]

I really like Donn's suggestion.

Perhaps we could try out a few choices on users and see which they prefer.

John

Donn Denman wrote:

> I'd like to propose a simplified model for item deletion and removal, 
> that only has one operation: Remove. I was inspired by iPhoto, which 
> supports non-silo collections which are a simplified form of our User 
> Defined collections. I think having a single operation makes both the 
> UI and the implementation simpler.
>
> Here's how it works. In general, removing an item just removes it from 
> that collection. The item can still exist in other collections. It 
> doesn't matter if the item was explicitly added to the collection, or 
> implicitly through a query rule. There is one exception: the All 
> collection. Since "All" contains /every/ item, removal from All 
> removes from all collections, and puts the item in the Trash.
>
> The Details, using the terms from the ItemRemovalAndDeletion Wiki:
> * The "Remove" operation is available on any collection.
> * The "All" collection is the only Library collection.
> * Removing an item from a Removal collection (Trash or Junk) removes 
> it from the Repository
> * Removing an item from a Library collection (All) puts the item in a 
> Removal collection (the Trash)
> * Removing an item from any other collection simply removes it from 
> that collection
> * All other affordances map onto Remove: Cut, Clear, the delete key, 
> dragging out of a collection, etc
>
> The down side to this proposal is that it's harder to delete an item, 
> because you have to remove it from the "All" collection. I think this 
> is OK, given that we have a system based on a robust capable 
> repository for our data. The user may want to periodically go to "All" 
> and grab a bunch of older items to remove. The Archive collection 
> (post Kibble) can help with this cleanup - items that are neglected 
> end up in the Archive, and they are easy to get rid of.
>
> The up side is that it's very easy to remove things from any 
> collection - there's only one choice. There's never any confusion 
> about what the different affordances do.
>
> I think we should start with this simple model, and if we decide we 
> need a shortcut to actually Trash/Delete an item then we can add that, 
> and we get back to the model proposed in the ItemRemovalAndDeletion wiki.
>
> - Donn
>
> On Oct 13, 2004, at 11:09 AM, Donn Denman wrote:
>
>     This looks like a very well thought out design for disposing of
>     items.
>
>     Overall, I think it looks really good. But my initial reaction was
>     that it's too complicated - why do we need /both/ deletion and
>     removal operations? Reading further, I see that our Item
>     Collections need a "remove" operation that's independent of
>     deletion. For User Defined collections, removing the item from the
>     collection is very different from deleting the item altogether.
>     You are just excluding it from that group of items. But "Library"
>     collections are more automatic - they don't really have an
>     exclusions list so removing the item must be done with deletion.
>     This all makes sense to me, and it looks like the model of the
>     Trash is good and consistent.
>
>     Detailed Notes
>     -------------------
>     Chandler has a "Delete" menu item in the Edit menu. I assume that
>     it does the same thing that the delete key does, since the delete
>     key is the keyboard accelerator for the delete menu item.
>
>     I'm wondering how we'll be implementing the Removal collections.
>     Since the items are still in the repository, all our queries will
>     find them. So we'll need to update our queries to not include them
>     somehow. Maybe there's a better way to do this than simply adding
>     an extra rule to each query. Ideally when we move items to a
>     removal collection, we'd actually move them to another section of
>     the repository which we can exclude from our normal queries. But
>     these are implementation details that don't really have anything
>     to do with the UI design, and should probably be moved to a
>     different discussion thread.
>
>     - Donn Denman
>
>     On Oct 12, 2004, at 2:13 PM, Chih-Chao Lam wrote:
>
>         I've updated the page based on review comments from Mitch.
>         Hopefully, this will make it more easily understood by everyone.
>
>             http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Chandler/ItemRemovalAndDeletion
>
>
>
>         chao
>
>         On Oct 12, 2004, at 9:18 AM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
>
>             The design team has been working on a spec for item
>             deletion and removal (from item collections). It would be
>             great to get the cpia folks to take a look at the spec and
>             give feedback (and anyone else who is interested).
>
>             http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Chandler/ItemRemovalAndDeletion
>
>
>             Cheers,
>             Katie
>             _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
>             Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
>             http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>         _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
>         Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
>         http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>     _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
>     Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
>     http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
>Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
>http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>  
>