Options/Preferences for Firefox 2
beltzner
preferences panel?
I have filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340677 to
look at some potential changes to the Firefox Preferences Panel. The
goals and rationale for this redesign were:
- increase consistency of language, layout and style used
- consolidate privacy options and Clear Private Data tool
- employ more user centric concepts and terms
- clean up and organize some of the prefs added during development cycle
Perhaps the most contentious change in here is the removal of the
"Clear Now" buttons from the privacy preferences. My rationale for
this in the proposal was that we've got a spifferoo new tool for doing
precisely that, and duplicating the functionality everywhere seemed to
be more confusing than anything. Also, the action of "clearing now" is
more of a tool, fitting with where the "Clear Private Data ..."
function is than it is an option; the options are about whether or not
to retain that data.
Critiques welcome, as although I spent several days going over the
various use cases and phrasings, I'm sure that I've probably missed
something, and I can benefit from your keen eyes! I'd suggest that we
discuss philosophical issues here, and then put action items in the
bug itself. The bug will link to this thread.
cheers,
mike
--
/ mike beltzner / phenomenologist / mozilla corporation /
Brett Wilson
the privacy section.
I also like how you've replaced the group box with "headings" like MS
Office does nowadays. All the boxes kind of clutter up the screen more.
I didn't see the safe browsing options.
Brett
beltzner
> I didn't see the safe browsing options.
They're in the "Security" pane, merged with the other options. I
didn't feel like there was any special need to call them out above the
others; to do so would have just fragmented the page more. Let me know
if you think that's wrongthinking.
Peter Kasting
> Critiques welcome, as although I spent several days going over the
> various use cases and phrasings, I'm sure that I've probably missed
> something, and I can benefit from your keen eyes!
First-pass feedback as I read the bug:
* The re-order of the main categories is a good change.
* Main->Home Page. Third option should perhaps be "Use page(s)" instead
of "Use this page" ("this" is confusing with the "Use Current" button at
end, and "(s)" tries to suggest to users that they can load multiple
pages in tabs, which isn't discoverable right now). Also, have you
considered some of the other newsgroup discussion regarding an option to
start with your "most recent pages" were? IMO that would best go here,
and would be a nice way of exposing session restore functionality and
alleviating some of the UI questions about checkboxes/buttons on closing
multiple tabs.
* Main->Downloads. "Close it when all downloads finish" perhaps?
* Main->System Defaults. Seems weird to have a whole heading for this
single option, and I don't know why most users care about having this
option on the main tab. It just doesn't feel that important to me.
* Tabs. "When a link opens a new web page" is confusing, because in my
mind all links open new web pages. I can't think of a good alternate
wording though; perhaps "Links that try to open new windows should open
in:"? Hmmm. Also, I really, really, really would like "the same tab"
as an option (not default). Finally, what does "Warn me when I open
lots of tabs at once" mean?
* Content. Are all three of these top checkboxes on by default? Why
not strip out the fonts & colors stuff altogether, or else make a pair
of radio buttons, the default of which is "Let pages specify their own
fonts and colors," and the other is something like our current
font/color controls?
* Content->Feeds. I would move the feed reader choice up to the line
about subscribing with a feed reader. "Always subscribe using this feed
reader: [ Bloglines |v]"
* Content->File Types. This is too wordy, but I don't really have an
improved suggestion. Perhaps "Set what actions &prodName; should take
when it sees certain types of files"?
* Privacy. Super glad you got rid of the nested tabs here, thanks
much. I sort of understand why you removed the "Clear" buttons, but
there are still a lot of "Show" buttons and other sorts of parallel
functionality here, so I'm not sure just removing the "Clear" choices is
helpful. I'd probably opt to put them back, but I'll reserve judgment
on that until playing more with the "spiffy tool for doing that" that
you mentioned.
* Privacy->History. Are the top two checkboxes in History on by
default? Also, I assume the other choice in the "remember downloaded
items" dropdown is "until &prodName; exits"?
* Privacy->Cookies. Instead of multiple checkboxes for accepting
cookies, I'd use a set of radio buttons or dropdown to select between
three states: "Never", "After asking me", "Always". Default to
"Always". Also, I'm not sure about the wording of "Only accept cookies
from sites that I visit". I'm not sure a user knows what this means.
"For the originating site only" was also confusing, but seemed a tiny
bit clearer, and was shorter.
* Security. Are these checkboxes all checked by default? Also I'm not
sure about the word "forgery" for safe browsing. That's too specific a
word, I'd think. What about sites that aren't pretending to be anyone
you know, they're just blatantly doing something malicious (like trying
to install malware)?
* Security->Warning Messages. Again, this seems wordy. What about a
checkbox (on by default) to "warn me about possibly insecure actions",
and then have the settings box give the user fine-grained control?
* Advanced. It always felt like a cop-out to me that we stuck on
"Advanced" in then had tabs inside it. I'd really love to see some way
of getting rid of the nested tabs here as was done for Privacy. Don't
know how to pull this off, exactly :(
* Advanced->General->Accessibility. I'm not sure this would be good,
but instead of a checkbox for FAYT, what about a drop down like:
"Quickly find text in a page [ When I press / |v]" where the other two
choices are "never" and "When I start typing"?
* Advanced->General->Browsing. I'd change this section to "Scrolling"
since that's what it's about... will either of these be on by default?
* Advanced->Network->Cache. This doesn't feel like "Network" to me.
I'd probably put it in "General", but there's a lot of stuff there
already. Wherever it ends up, I wonder if we should expose a control
for the bfcache as well...
* Advanced->Update. I'd simplify the "Automatically check for updates"
stuff to a single checkbox that checks or not (on by default). Why do
users care about individually controlling whether Firefox checks for
updates to their add-ons?
*Advanced->Encryption. I'm not qualified to make these changes in
detail, but I'd like to see a massive simplification here if possible.
There's a lot of buttons and acronyms right now that make my eyes glaze
over.
Overall, I think your changes are generally improvements. Nice work.
PK
Robert Marshall
be good... just a few points:
> - radio buttons for home page to make it clear/easy to switch
I agree, but I think there should still be a "Blank Page" option.
> - moved primary download options to first tab since they're
> frequently used
Any idea how often "Close the Download Manager when all downloads are
complete" is used? I don't think it's worth UI, especially not on the
first page (though I'm willing to be proved/proven wrong).
> | When a link opens a new web page, open it in
This sounds a bit vague (most links open new web pages). Maybe something
like "When a link tries to open a new window" would fit better? I first
thought of "site" instead of "link", but that makes it sound like we're
talking about unrequested pop-ups.
> - keeping cookies for "this session only" becomes part of the "always
> clear some or all of my private data" settings
What if someone wants to keep most cookies for "this session only", but
has exceptions set? Using Clear Private Data would clear all cookies.
> | [ ] Enable Javascript
> | [ ] Enable Java
I'm not convinced that JavaScript is a "security" option, and I'm not
sure that Java needs an option at all. If Java then why not Flash,
Shockwave, Real, etc.?
As for the lack of clearing buttons, I think it's generally a good thing
- I've clicked one accidentally whilst trying to manage prefs at least
once. Depends what you want to do to the Clear Private Data UI. :)
Gavin Sharp
> > | [ ] Enable Javascript
> > | [ ] Enable Java
> I'm not convinced that JavaScript is a "security" option, and I'm not
> sure that Java needs an option at all. If Java then why not Flash,
> Shockwave, Real, etc.?
I agree. The "Security" tab is not the first place I'd look for the
"Enable Java[Script]" options, especially considering that there is a
"Content" pane that provides other options for what web pages can and
can't do. I think that the majority of people that disable JavaScript do
it to block annoyances like scrolling tickers and other dynamic page
effects, and that fits in much better with "Block popups" and "Load
images" than it does with safe browsing or security warning preferences.
Gavin
Peter Kasting
>> I'm not convinced that JavaScript is a "security" option, and I'm not
>> sure that Java needs an option at all. If Java then why not Flash,
>> Shockwave, Real, etc.?
>>
>
> "Enable Java[Script]" options, especially considering that there is a
> "Content" pane that provides other options for what web pages can and
> can't do. I think that the majority of people that disable JavaScript do
> it to block annoyances like scrolling tickers and other dynamic page
> effects, and that fits in much better with "Block popups" and "Load
> images" than it does with safe browsing or security warning preferences.
Agreed, and also agreed on the "Why Java but not Flash" sort of
question. There may be implementation reasons the distinction is
sensical, but from a user perspective they don't seem different.
PK
Myk Melez
> What would a Firefox release be like without a re-working of the
> preferences panel?
I shudder to think.
Mike, this looks great and is a significant improvement. I wish you
could go through all our UI like this! A few notes below...
> - multiple homepages shouldn't be the default action for "use current"
Is there another way to do this? Presumably this is a power user
feature, so it's fine not to show it on this pref panel, but we should
probably make sure it's exposed elsewhere or else explicitly decide that
we're removing this capability.
> | When a link opens a new web page, open it in |
> | (o) a new tab |
> | ( ) a new window |
The phrasing here is much improved, but this description might confuse
users who think "opens a new web page" means any time they click a link.
I'd instead say: "When a link tries to open a new window, open it in".
Then I'd put "( ) a new window" first, since it reads better for the
first option to be the thing the link is trying to do.
> | [ ] Always show the tab bar |
This seems like a good change, but note that it reverses the logic of
the current pref "Hide the tab bar when only one web site is open" and
thus requires code changes in addition to a pref language change.
> | [ ] Load images automatically (Exceptions...) |
> | [ ] Resize large images to fit in the window
I wonder if it makes more sense to use "shrink" instead of "resize".
After all, we never grow images to fit into a window. Also, you might
use "automatically" here as well, since users can resize manually even
if this pref isn't checked. Also, perhaps in -> into.
> | Default size: [ 16pt |v] (Colors ...) |
It's strange that all color options are in a separate dialog. I'd think
a couple basic options would be in this panel, with the rest in the same
"Advanced..." dialog as the fonts.
> | [ ] Remember what I enter in forms and the search bar |
in -> into
> | [ ] Remember items that I've downloaded [until I remove them|v] |
items that I've -> items I've
(colloquial, but perhaps more readable)
> | [ ] Only accept cookies from sites that I visit |
sites that I -> sites I
> | Clear Private Data -------------------------------------------- |
> | [ ] Always clear some or all of my private data |
> | when I close %prodName (Settings...) |
Seems like this should just be "Clear my private data when I close
%prodname", since "always" is implied here (as it is for just about all
these settings), while "some or all" seems more confusing (since
ambiguous) than enlightening (it doesn't clearly redirect users to the
Settings button to set the options).
> | [ ] Use caret browsing to control the cursor |
This sounds strange, although I can't think of anything better.
-myk
Peter Kasting
>> | [ ] Load images automatically (Exceptions...) |
>> | [ ] Resize large images to fit in the window
>
>
>
> in -> into
I don't agree with these. "into" seems much more awkward. In the first
case I could maybe see "inside", but "in" seems good too.
>> | [ ] Use caret browsing to control the cursor |
>
> This sounds strange, although I can't think of anything better.
"Allow the caret to move around the whole page"? "Let cursor keys move
the caret anywhere"? "Allow the caret outside editable areas"?
PK
Brett Wilson
> "Allow the caret to move around the whole page"? "Let cursor keys move
> the caret anywhere"? "Allow the caret outside editable areas"?
Can we avoid the term caret anywhere? Only programmers call it that.
Normal people usually call it the cursor.
Perhaps something like "Move within pages using the cursor"
Peter Kasting
OK, s/cursor/arrow/ and s/caret/cursor/ in my suggestions in those cases.
PK
Ian Hickson
> >
> > | [ ] Resize large images to fit in the window
>
> I wonder if it makes more sense to use "shrink" instead of "resize".
> After all, we never grow images to fit into a window. Also, you might
> use "automatically" here as well, since users can resize manually even
> if this pref isn't checked. Also, perhaps in -> into.
I've previously suggested that we should remove this pref. Instead,
Firefox should just remember what you last did to the images, and redo
that the next time you load an image.
> > | Default size: [ 16pt |v] (Colors ...) |
For a proposal on what I think we should do to the Fonts UI, see:
http://www.hixie.ch/specs/css/font-size-ui/font-size-ui
> > | [ ] Use caret browsing to control the cursor |
>
> This sounds strange, although I can't think of anything better.
I don't have a proposal for better text, but I would like to suggest
we put "(F7)" at the end of that text, to give people a link to the
shortcut for this pref.
--
Ian Hickson
Pam Greene
> >
> > This sounds strange, although I can't think of anything better.
I can't even figure out what that means, so I hope we can find a
better way to say it. If someone can explain it, I'll try to come up
with better wording. "Move the cursor with the arrow keys"?
- Pam
Myk Melez
> I can't even figure out what that means, so I hope we can find a
> better way to say it. If someone can explain it, I'll try to come up
> with better wording. "Move the cursor with the arrow keys"?
The arrow keys work both with and without this setting. Without the
setting, they scroll pages the way most people expect: when you press an
arrow key, the page immediately moves in the direction you indicated (so
long as you haven't focused a field, and your cursor isn't over a
plugin, and there's more content in that direction, etc.).
With the setting, a cursor appears in every page, and the arrow keys
scroll the cursor, not the page, until the cursor reaches the edge of
the page, just like in document editors (except that you can't actually
edit the text at the cursor position). The setting also enables you to
select text by holding down the shift key.
You can enable/disable the setting temporarily by pressing F7.
-myk
Myk Melez
> The arrow keys work both with and without this setting. Without the
> setting, they scroll pages the way most people expect: when you press an
> arrow key, the page immediately moves in the direction you indicated (so
> long as you haven't focused a field, and your cursor isn't over a
> plugin, and there's more content in that direction, etc.).
Err, s/cursor/mouse pointer/
-myk
Mike Connor
On 8-Jun-06, at 3:14 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> * Main->Home Page. Third option should perhaps be "Use page(s)"
> instead of "Use this page" ("this" is confusing with the "Use
> Current" button at end, and "(s)" tries to suggest to users that
> they can load multiple pages in tabs, which isn't discoverable
> right now). Also, have you considered some of the other newsgroup
> discussion regarding an option to start with your "most recent
> pages" were? IMO that would best go here, and would be a nice way
> of exposing session restore functionality and alleviating some of
> the UI questions about checkboxes/buttons on closing multiple tabs.
This is an advanced feature, and tends to confuse users (based on
bugs/forums/irc questions). I'd like to drop the current multiple
homepage impl, and allow users to specify a bookmark folder to open
instead (that was the plan for Places, its marginally extra work to
do for Bookmarks).
> * Main->Downloads. "Close it when all downloads finish" perhaps?
That seems less correct.
> * Main->System Defaults. Seems weird to have a whole heading for
> this single option, and I don't know why most users care about
> having this option on the main tab. It just doesn't feel that
> important to me.
Everything has a heading (and extensions can append here). This is
important from a conversion perspective, so people can easily find
how to make something default.
> * Tabs. "When a link opens a new web page" is confusing, because
> in my mind all links open new web pages. I can't think of a good
> alternate wording though; perhaps "Links that try to open new
> windows should open in:"? Hmmm. Also, I really, really, really
> would like "the same tab" as an option (not default). Finally,
> what does "Warn me when I open lots of tabs at once" mean?
Same tab is destructive, you can do it still via about:config.
> * Content. Are all three of these top checkboxes on by default?
> Why not strip out the fonts & colors stuff altogether, or else make
> a pair of radio buttons, the default of which is "Let pages specify
> their own fonts and colors," and the other is something like our
> current font/color controls?
That division isn't right at all, since many sites do the right thing
and allow users to specify their own default fonts without screwing
up layout, etc.
> * Content->Feeds. I would move the feed reader choice up to the
> line about subscribing with a feed reader. "Always subscribe using
> this feed reader: [ Bloglines |v]"
Except that that choice is used whether you're asking each time or
always using the feed reader.
> * Content->File Types. This is too wordy, but I don't really have
> an improved suggestion. Perhaps "Set what actions &prodName;
> should take when it sees certain types of files"?
That seems marginally better, but not quite right either.
> * Privacy->History. Are the top two checkboxes in History on by
> default? Also, I assume the other choice in the "remember
> downloaded items" dropdown is "until &prodName; exits"?
All three are on by default, just like they are now.
> * Privacy->Cookies. Instead of multiple checkboxes for accepting
> cookies, I'd use a set of radio buttons or dropdown to select
> between three states: "Never", "After asking me", "Always".
> Default to "Always". Also, I'm not sure about the wording of "Only
> accept cookies from sites that I visit". I'm not sure a user knows
> what this means. "For the originating site only" was also
> confusing, but seemed a tiny bit clearer, and was shorter.
Always/Ask/Never is three radiobuttons, vs. two checkboxes, and not
an obvious improvement. Binary choices seem to be easier to make, in
my experience. And "originating site" isn't clearer that "only sites
I visit" in my mind. Originating site seems ill-defined.
> * Security. Are these checkboxes all checked by default? Also I'm
> not sure about the word "forgery" for safe browsing. That's too
> specific a word, I'd think. What about sites that aren't
> pretending to be anyone you know, they're just blatantly doing
> something malicious (like trying to install malware)?
All on by default. Safe Browsing does anti-phishing, it doesn't do
site advisor-style malware warnings.
> * Security->Warning Messages. Again, this seems wordy. What about
> a checkbox (on by default) to "warn me about possibly insecure
> actions", and then have the settings box give the user fine-grained
> control?
Because that requires additional code for that master toggle to be
useful
> * Advanced. It always felt like a cop-out to me that we stuck on
> "Advanced" in then had tabs inside it. I'd really love to see some
> way of getting rid of the nested tabs here as was done for
> Privacy. Don't know how to pull this off, exactly :(
The other option is an IE-style treeview, which is equally suboptimal.
> * Advanced->General->Accessibility. I'm not sure this would be
> good, but instead of a checkbox for FAYT, what about a drop down
> like: "Quickly find text in a page [ When I press / |v]" where the
> other two choices are "never" and "When I start typing"?
Is there an existing pref for that?
> * Advanced->General->Browsing. I'd change this section to
> "Scrolling" since that's what it's about... will either of these be
> on by default?
It might have more, scrolling seems too specific.
> * Advanced->Update. I'd simplify the "Automatically check for
> updates" stuff to a single checkbox that checks or not (on by
> default). Why do users care about individually controlling whether
> Firefox checks for updates to their add-ons?
Lots of users disable addon update checking because they're using
older versions of frequently-updated extensions. We shouldn't force
these users to disable app update at the same time. Anyway, its in
advanced, its allowed to be finer-grained ;)
> *Advanced->Encryption. I'm not qualified to make these changes in
> detail, but I'd like to see a massive simplification here if
> possible. There's a lot of buttons and acronyms right now that
> make my eyes glaze over.
There's a ton of potential work here, but far beyond the scope of
what we can do by the 27th. Its also a massively complicated set of
options due to the massively complicated set of capabilities.
-- Mike
Mike Connor
On 8-Jun-06, at 6:12 PM, Myk Melez wrote:
>> - multiple homepages shouldn't be the default action for "use
>> current"
>
> Is there another way to do this? Presumably this is a power user
> feature, so it's fine not to show it on this pref panel, but we
> should probably make sure it's exposed elsewhere or else explicitly
> decide that we're removing this capability.
The best impl, IMO, would be to link to a folder, and open that
specific folder on startup (and do that dynamically, as opposed to
the current impl)
>> | When a link opens a new web page, open it in |
>> | (o) a new tab |
>> | ( ) a new window |
>
> The phrasing here is much improved, but this description might
> confuse users who think "opens a new web page" means any time they
> click a link. I'd instead say: "When a link tries to open a new
> window, open it in". Then I'd put "( ) a new window" first, since
> it reads better for the first option to be the thing the link is
> trying to do.s
except we're defaulting to a new tab, and its weird to have the
second option be the default (OS X does this in places, drives me
_nuts_).
>
>> | [ ] Always show the tab bar |
>
> This seems like a good change, but note that it reverses the logic
> of the current pref "Hide the tab bar when only one web site is
> open" and thus requires code changes in addition to a pref language
> change.
The prefwindow has the ability to invert boolean values, just
requires a reverse attr on the checkbox, iirc.
>
>> | [ ] Load images automatically (Exceptions...) |
>> | [ ] Resize large images to fit in the window
>
> I wonder if it makes more sense to use "shrink" instead of
> "resize". After all, we never grow images to fit into a window.
> Also, you might use "automatically" here as well, since users can
> resize manually even if this pref isn't checked. Also, perhaps in -
> > into.
Now that the last thing persists with this unchecked, I could go for
killing the pref (since the default is to resize, and if you leave
something non-resized, you know how to toggle already)
- Mike
Chris Ilias
> Its one of those legacy browser prefs that we can't seem to kill. It'd
> be nice to have a checkbox for Flash as well, but that seems to be more
> complex?
The "Flash" checkbox in the Prefbar extension, just renames the plugin.
I don't know if you'd consider that an ugly way of doing it, but hey, it
works. :-)
--
Chris Ilias
mozilla.test.multimedia moderator
Mozilla links <http://ilias.ca>
(Please do not email me tech support questions)
Axel Hecht
That sounds to me like no name in the world could really describe this.
Let alone after someone translated it out of context ;-).
Could we just use 'some' name for this and link to a help item there?
I'm not sure if the help viewer and the prefwindow cooperate, though.
Hrm, they don't seem to do so on the mac, is that a bug?
To make localization of this item less easy to get wrong, could we get a
good comment on what this does into the DTD? Apparently many folks don't
know this, and localizers just read the DTD out of context.
Axel
Bram van Leur
an UI-guy, but more of an enthusiastic user. Anything I state is just
guessing.
beltzner schreef:
> - employ more user centric concepts and terms
I believe that some of the terms in browserland seem strange to users
and therefore can't go without further explanation.
The current prefs have "Cookies are pieces of information stored by
sites on your computer. They are used to remember login information and
other data." near the cookies options which makes it much easier to
understand.
You could:
1. Do Nothing. Some curious users browsing the prefs would skip this
options. A very (very) small part will look it up in the firefox help
or google.
2. Reinsert the explanation. Preference pages will get larger, maybe
too large and all of the text will scare them away.
3. Insert hyperlinks to the Firefox help where relevant. This would be
the only place this is done in the firefox UI and you don't see this
often in other applications so there probably is a reason this is a bad
idea.
This also applies to things like "cache", "smooth scrolling" and
"Javascript".
beltzner
some places where I've got some new things to throw in ..
On 6/8/06, Mike Connor <mco...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 8-Jun-06, at 3:14 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
>
> > * Tabs. "When a link opens a new web page" is confusing, because
> > in my mind all links open new web pages. I can't think of a good
> > alternate wording though; perhaps "Links that try to open new
> > windows should open in:"? Hmmm. Also, I really, really, really
> > would like "the same tab" as an option (not default). Finally,
> > what does "Warn me when I open lots of tabs at once" mean?
>
> Same tab is destructive, you can do it still via about:config.
Agreed; this pref was intentionally removed by bug 318168, and I'm in
agreement with Ben's rationale there.
I think I'll take Myk's suggested rewording on the "What a link opens
.." text. Good catch, though.
The "Warn me when I open lots of tabs at once" pref is being added by
bug 333734; I'm not 100% sure of the wording there, either, but best
place to discuss it is in that bug.
> > * Content. Are all three of these top checkboxes on by default?
> > Why not strip out the fonts & colors stuff altogether, or else make
> > a pair of radio buttons, the default of which is "Let pages specify
> > their own fonts and colors," and the other is something like our
> > current font/color controls?
>
> That division isn't right at all, since many sites do the right thing
> and allow users to specify their own default fonts without screwing
> up layout, etc.
To clarify: these are the fonts that we use when no other styled
content is specified. The Advanced ... window holds the pref for never
using stlye overrides. Admittedly this set of prefs is still a mess,
but changing it now would require a lot of work; I'll target that for
Fx3, and really like what Hixie suggested in this thread.
I'd considered putting the override pref in the main panel, but it's
really quite an advanced and low-use pref, and didn't think it
warranted front-and-centre treatment.
> > * Content->Feeds. I would move the feed reader choice up to the
> > line about subscribing with a feed reader. "Always subscribe using
> > this feed reader: [ Bloglines |v]"
>
> Except that that choice is used whether you're asking each time or
> always using the feed reader.
Might be clearer if we reverse the order. So:
| Feeds --------------------------------------------------------- |
| Feed Reader: [ Bloglines |v] |
| |
| When I click on a web feed |
| (o) Ask me what to use |
| ( ) Always subscribe with a Live Bookmark |
| ( ) Always subscribe using the Feed Reader |
Another possibility would be to put the Feed Reader drop-down in the
"System Defaults" header of the Main panel, but I don't like the idea
of splitting things up like that.
(also reversed the order of the prefs so the default is the first one)
> > * Content->File Types. This is too wordy, but I don't really have
> > an improved suggestion. Perhaps "Set what actions &prodName;
> > should take when it sees certain types of files"?
>
> That seems marginally better, but not quite right either.
alternatives:
"Manage how you want &prodName; to handle different types of files"
"Tell &prodName; what to do with different types of files"
> > * Privacy->History. Are the top two checkboxes in History on by
> > default? Also, I assume the other choice in the "remember
> > downloaded items" dropdown is "until &prodName; exits"?
>
> All three are on by default, just like they are now.
My bad; next version of the proposal will feature the right defaults.
It was getting late and I just started hammering through the ASCII :)
> > * Privacy->Cookies. Instead of multiple checkboxes for accepting
> > cookies, I'd use a set of radio buttons or dropdown to select
> > between three states: "Never", "After asking me", "Always".
> > Default to "Always". Also, I'm not sure about the wording of "Only
> > accept cookies from sites that I visit". I'm not sure a user knows
> > what this means. "For the originating site only" was also
> > confusing, but seemed a tiny bit clearer, and was shorter.
>
> Always/Ask/Never is three radiobuttons, vs. two checkboxes, and not
> an obvious improvement. Binary choices seem to be easier to make, in
> my experience. And "originating site" isn't clearer that "only sites
> I visit" in my mind. Originating site seems ill-defined.
Using radio buttons, it would look like this:
| Cookies ------------------------------------------------------- |
| ( ) Always accept cookies |
| ( ) Ask me before accepting a cookie |
| ( ) Never accept cookies |
| |
| [ ] Only accept cookies from sites that I'm looking at |
| |
| (Show Cookies ...) (Exceptions...) |
| |
I'd actually had it mocked up like that at one point, but then
realized that the "only accept cookies from sites that I'm looking at"
applies to the "always accept" and "ask me before" cases only. I
actually found it *less* confusing as a single option (cookies on/off)
with some additional options after the fact.
> > * Advanced. It always felt like a cop-out to me that we stuck on
> > "Advanced" in then had tabs inside it. I'd really love to see some
> > way of getting rid of the nested tabs here as was done for
> > Privacy. Don't know how to pull this off, exactly :(
>
> The other option is an IE-style treeview, which is equally suboptimal.
Once the user steps into "Advanced," I'm fine with the complexity
being stepped up a little as well. My goal was to make it so that the
things 80% of users needed to twiddle weren't in this panel.
> > * Advanced->General->Accessibility. I'm not sure this would be
> > good, but instead of a checkbox for FAYT, what about a drop down
> > like: "Quickly find text in a page [ When I press / |v]" where the
> > other two choices are "never" and "When I start typing"?
>
> Is there an existing pref for that?
I'm not even sure that we need to call out the fact that / acts as a
FAYT shortcut. The intent of this preference (to always search, even
without a "/") was for accessibility purposes. The emacs-stlye / for
quickfind is a power user feature, and we don't use the prefs dialog
to call out the keyboard shortcuts (except in cases where someone
might have accidentally hit the keyboard shortcut leaving them in a
screwed up state, like OS X's Cmd-F5)
beltzner
> > - radio buttons for home page to make it clear/easy to switch
> I agree, but I think there should still be a "Blank Page" option.
This is still achievable by users. All they need to do is create a
blank page, then hit "use current." I'm not too concerned about
removing a "Blank Page" option, and don't want an IE7 style bevy of
prefs for the homepage. IMO, there's already too many.
> Any idea how often "Close the Download Manager when all downloads are
> complete" is used? I don't think it's worth UI, especially not on the
> first page (though I'm willing to be proved/proven wrong).
Pretty common, actually. There are a lot of people who don't like
having the window hanging around. I don't think we can kill this yet,
but personally I have plans for the DM in Firefox 3, making it a
little less obnoxious, generally speaking.
> > | When a link opens a new web page, open it in
> This sounds a bit vague (most links open new web pages). Maybe something
> like "When a link tries to open a new window" would fit better? I first
> thought of "site" instead of "link", but that makes it sound like we're
> talking about unrequested pop-ups.
Myk's suggested wording was better, and I'll revise the proposal to use it.
> > - keeping cookies for "this session only" becomes part of the "always
> > clear some or all of my private data" settings
> What if someone wants to keep most cookies for "this session only", but
> has exceptions set? Using Clear Private Data would clear all cookies.
God. The control we give users over cookies. Sigh. Two ways to handle
this. First, say that if the user wants that sort of fine-grained
control, they should just set "always ask". Second, add an option:
| Cookies ------------------------------------------------------- |
| [ ] Accept cookies from sites (Exceptions...) |
| [ ] Only accept cookies from sites that I visit |
| [ ] Always ask before accepting a cookie |
| [ ] Only keep the cookies until I close &prodName; |
| |
| (Show Cookies... ) |
I prefer the former over the latter.
beltzner
I liked mconnor's idea of using a bookmark folder. Let's do that, if we can.
> > | When a link opens a new web page, open it in |
> > | (o) a new tab |
> > | ( ) a new window |
>
> The phrasing here is much improved, but this description might confuse
> users who think "opens a new web page" means any time they click a link.
> I'd instead say: "When a link tries to open a new window, open it in".
> Then I'd put "( ) a new window" first, since it reads better for the
> first option to be the thing the link is trying to do.
I'll take 50% of this suggestion! Your wording is better. :)
> > | [ ] Load images automatically (Exceptions...) |
> > | [ ] Resize large images to fit in the window
>
> I wonder if it makes more sense to use "shrink" instead of "resize".
> After all, we never grow images to fit into a window. Also, you might
> use "automatically" here as well, since users can resize manually even
> if this pref isn't checked. Also, perhaps in -> into.
As per mconnor and hixie's recommendations, I'll just kill the resize
pref altogether.
> > | Default size: [ 16pt |v] (Colors ...) |
>
> It's strange that all color options are in a separate dialog. I'd think
> a couple basic options would be in this panel, with the rest in the same
> "Advanced..." dialog as the fonts.
Agreed, but was trying to limit scope. Let's get this stuff done
first, then if there's time, we can merge the colours and fonts
sub-dialogs.
> > | [ ] Remember items that I've downloaded [until I remove them|v] |
>
> items that I've -> items I've
> (colloquial, but perhaps more readable)
Agreed.
> > | [ ] Only accept cookies from sites that I visit |
>
> sites that I -> sites I
I changed this to "Only accept cookies from sites I'm looking at"
which is yet a bit more clear.
> Seems like this should just be "Clear my private data when I close
> %prodname", since "always" is implied here (as it is for just about all
> these settings), while "some or all" seems more confusing (since
> ambiguous) than enlightening (it doesn't clearly redirect users to the
> Settings button to set the options).
Agreed.
> > | [ ] Use caret browsing to control the cursor |
>
> This sounds strange, although I can't think of anything better.
I think Brett was on to something good here.
beltzner
> For a proposal on what I think we should do to the Fonts UI, see:
>
> http://www.hixie.ch/specs/css/font-size-ui/font-size-ui
Is there a bug on this? I like these changes a lot.
> I don't have a proposal for better text, but I would like to suggest
> we put "(F7)" at the end of that text, to give people a link to the
> shortcut for this pref.
Agreed for this case, where accidentally hitting this pref can wind
the user in a world of confusing behaviour.
beltzner
You seem to be on to something ... some counter-suggestions:
"Use the arrow keys to control the cursor inside pages"
"Let the cursor move anywhere within pages"
Peter Kasting
> On 8-Jun-06, at 3:14 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
>
>> instead of "Use this page" ("this" is confusing with the "Use
>> Current" button at end, and "(s)" tries to suggest to users that they
>> can load multiple pages in tabs, which isn't discoverable right
>> now). Also, have you considered some of the other newsgroup
>> discussion regarding an option to start with your "most recent pages"
>> were? IMO that would best go here, and would be a nice way of
>> exposing session restore functionality and alleviating some of the UI
>> questions about checkboxes/buttons on closing multiple tabs.
>
> This is an advanced feature, and tends to confuse users (based on
> bugs/forums/irc questions). I'd like to drop the current multiple
> homepage impl, and allow users to specify a bookmark folder to open
> instead (that was the plan for Places, its marginally extra work to do
> for Bookmarks).
Sounds good. I presume you were replying to the "use multiple pages"
part of my comment -- any comment on the session restore part?
> * Main->Downloads. "Close it when all downloads finish" perhaps?
>
> That seems less correct.
But if it's closed when "all downloads are finished", then it doesn't
make sense that we can manually open the box while there aren't current
downloads. The code closes the box when the last download finishes, so
it seems more exact to match that in the wording... it's not a big deal
in either case though.
> * Main->System Defaults. Seems weird to have a whole heading for this
> single option, and I don't know why most users care about having this
> option on the main tab. It just doesn't feel that important to me.
>
> Everything has a heading (and extensions can append here). This is
> important from a conversion perspective, so people can easily find how
> to make something default.
I wasn't suggesting we have the option without a heading, just that
seeing things as-is looked odd and made me feel like the option should
move or disappear.
Don't we pop up a dialog asking about this and let users set as default
and set "always check" there? That seems MORE obvious than the prefs
window. If we didn't do that, then yes, we'd definitely need this here,
but as is it feels unnecessary to me.
>> * Security. Are these checkboxes all checked by default? Also I'm
>> not sure about the word "forgery" for safe browsing. That's too
>> specific a word, I'd think. What about sites that aren't pretending
>> to be anyone you know, they're just blatantly doing something
>> malicious (like trying to install malware)?
>
> All on by default. Safe Browsing does anti-phishing, it doesn't do
> site advisor-style malware warnings.
Huh, I guess I was mistaken. I really thought Safe Browsing could
potentially redirect users away from more types of bad sites than just
phishing ones. Maybe that's in the future cards or something.
>
>> * Security->Warning Messages. Again, this seems wordy. What about a
>> checkbox (on by default) to "warn me about possibly insecure
>> actions", and then have the settings box give the user fine-grained
>> control?
>
> Because that requires additional code for that master toggle to be useful
Well, yes. I didn't realize this redesign was trying to avoid any new
code. Maybe something to consider for the future?
>
>> * Advanced->General->Browsing. I'd change this section to
>> "Scrolling" since that's what it's about... will either of these be
>> on by default?
>
> It might have more, scrolling seems too specific.
OK, but "Browsing" seems like a meaningless heading and doesn't seem
terribly related to the two options currently inside it. Are there
known possibilities for what more might go in here?
Thanks very much for the detailed reply. More comments coming in a
second email.
PK
Ian Hickson
>
> On 6/8/06, Ian Hickson <ian.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For a proposal on what I think we should do to the Fonts UI, see:
> >
> > http://www.hixie.ch/specs/css/font-size-ui/font-size-ui
>
> Is there a bug on this? I like these changes a lot.
I don't think so. It would depend on 4821, which (when I wrote that
proposal) wasn't likely to get fixed in the forseeable future.
> > I don't have a proposal for better text, but I would like to suggest
> > we put "(F7)" at the end of that text, to give people a link to the
> > shortcut for this pref.
>
> Agreed for this case, where accidentally hitting this pref can wind
> the user in a world of confusing behaviour.
Great!
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
madhav...@gmail.com
jargon-y. It's a term that will be familiar to people in the media
sector and to web designers, but I'm not sure that it will be familiar
to home users. It's probably not actively misleading, but neither does
it have a lot of explanatory power.
As a replacement, "webpages" maybe? It's not great in that it It
doesn't fit everything that's currently in the content category (one
benefit of "content" being that it's vague/undefined enough to be a
catch-all), but it's an example of a more home user-recognizable
concept.
Madhava
beltzner wrote:
> What would a Firefox release be like without a re-working of the
> preferences panel?
>
> I have filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340677 to
> look at some potential changes to the Firefox Preferences Panel. The
> goals and rationale for this redesign were:
>
> - increase consistency of language, layout and style used
> - consolidate privacy options and Clear Private Data tool
> - employ more user centric concepts and terms
> - clean up and organize some of the prefs added during development cycle
>
> Perhaps the most contentious change in here is the removal of the
> "Clear Now" buttons from the privacy preferences. My rationale for
> this in the proposal was that we've got a spifferoo new tool for doing
> precisely that, and duplicating the functionality everywhere seemed to
> be more confusing than anything. Also, the action of "clearing now" is
> more of a tool, fitting with where the "Clear Private Data ..."
> function is than it is an option; the options are about whether or not
> to retain that data.
>
> Critiques welcome, as although I spent several days going over the
> various use cases and phrasings, I'm sure that I've probably missed
> something, and I can benefit from your keen eyes! I'd suggest that we
> discuss philosophical issues here, and then put action items in the
> bug itself. The bug will link to this thread.
Wladimir Palant
> I've previously suggested that we should remove this pref. Instead,
> Firefox should just remember what you last did to the images, and redo
> that the next time you load an image.
I don't think that's discoverable. For example I still don't know how
you can "shrink" an image manually (since for most images you can't).
Wladimir
Myk Melez
> On 6/8/06, Brett Wilson <bre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps something like "Move within pages using the cursor"
>
> You seem to be on to something ... some counter-suggestions:
>
> "Use the arrow keys to control the cursor inside pages"
> "Let the cursor move anywhere within pages"
The problem with these is they all imply there's a cursor even if you
don't set the pref, while actually the cursor only appears if the pref
is set.
Perhaps something like:
Use a cursor to move around within pages.
-myk
Pam Greene
Or, to point out that this is the I-beam cursor rather than the usual
arrow cursor,
Use a text cursor to move around within pages.
Peter Kasting
> beltzner wrote:
>> "Let the cursor move anywhere within pages"
>
> The problem with these is they all imply there's a cursor even if you
> don't set the pref, while actually the cursor only appears if the pref
> is set.
Not true. There's a cursor in editable areas even without the pref.
The pref just lets that cursor escape the bounds of the editable areas
and run free. Or at least that's how I think of it :)
PK
Ian Pottinger
> That sounds to me like no name in the world could really describe this.
> Let alone after someone translated it out of context ;-).
A few suggestions using different points of view:
Cursor toggle: ( ) Always show a text cursor.
...Navigation: ( ) Allow navigation within a page using a text cursor.
"Editability": (o) Only show the text cursor where text can be edited.
...Experience: ( ) Show a word processor like cursor in web pages.
I'm sure someone out there can come up with the right metaphor for this
feature. It will just take a bit of creative thinking.
Wladimir Palant
> "Editability": (o) Only show the text cursor where text can be edited.
<input type="text" readonly>
:)
Mike Shaver
<madhav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One thought: I wonder if "Content," as a main category, is too
> jargon-y. It's a term that will be familiar to people in the media
> sector and to web designers, but I'm not sure that it will be familiar
> to home users. It's probably not actively misleading, but neither does
> it have a lot of explanatory power.
I think people are generally pretty familiar with "content", and the
sorts of people who will (dare I say "should"?) be tweaking or
interested in those prefs are almost certainly familiar.
I also have a screed about educating users as we entertain them, or
something, that I will save for another time.
Mike
Adam Kowalczyk
> On 6/8/06, Robert Marshall <newsm...@rdmsoft.com> wrote:
>> > - radio buttons for home page to make it clear/easy to switch
>> I agree, but I think there should still be a "Blank Page" option.
>
> This is still achievable by users. All they need to do is create a
> blank page, then hit "use current."
The above also applies to picking homepage from bookmarks. Why keep one
but not the other?
> [x] Warn me when I close a window with multiple tabs
> [x] Warn me when I open lots of tabs at once
Don't these to naturally belong to Warning Messages in Security? They
don't seem to deserve so much exposure.
- Adam
beltzner
> > This is still achievable by users. All they need to do is create a
> > blank page, then hit "use current."
>
> The above also applies to picking homepage from bookmarks. Why keep one
> but not the other?
As mconnor mentioned, with bookmarks, a user can pick a bookmark
folder and have them open in tabs. We're trying to keep our advanced
use cases while not necessarily exposing them directly.
> > [x] Warn me when I close a window with multiple tabs
> > [x] Warn me when I open lots of tabs at once
>
> Don't these to naturally belong to Warning Messages in Security? They
> don't seem to deserve so much exposure.
These options are about settings for behaviour of our tabbed browsing
feature. The security warnings are about application and personal
security while browsing. I think they're correctly categorized.
tjb
> I have filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340677 to
> look at some potential changes to the Firefox Preferences Panel. The
> goals and rationale for this redesign were:
[snip]
It seems that the ability to to set a blank home page has been removed (in
1.5.0.4 the user can click 'Use Blank Page'). Is the only way of setting a
blank home page, then, to manually type in 'about:blank'?
How about a radio button such as 'Don't use a home page'? A lot of people
don't use home pages, myself included.
Also, I don't feel that exposing 'about:blank' to the user is a good idea
-- and this applies to 1.5.0.4, wherein if you click 'Use Blank Page',
'about:blank' appears in the relevant field. It's too technical, and so
potentially scary.
tjb
> Also, I don't feel that exposing 'about:blank' to the user is a good idea
> -- and this applies to 1.5.0.4, wherein if you click 'Use Blank Page',
> 'about:blank' appears in the relevant field. It's too technical, and so
> potentially scary.