After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 95467 - Tab switching on tab closure is unintuitive
Tab switching on tab closure is unintuitive
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 94256
Product: galeon
Classification: Deprecated
Component: User interface
1.2.99
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Marco Pesenti Gritti
Yanko Kaneti
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-10-11 04:38 UTC by lwillis
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description lwillis 2002-10-11 04:38:56 UTC
Copied from galeon-devel:

> > >- The logic for which tab to move to when you close a tab is awful [For
> > >  me] in galeon 2 compared with galeon 1
> > 
> > I'm open to changes about this. Could you elaborate ? What you think is
> > the right logic and why, and why current one suck.
> > (Galeon 1 had a pref about it so I'm not even sure of what behavior you
> > are talking about).
> 
> I can't see a pref about closing tabs in my galeon 1 (galeon 1.2.0) but
> it does the right thing for me all of the time.
> 
> I think the right algorithm is:
> 
> - If there is a tab to the right
>   - Focus that tab
> - If not
>   - If there is a tab to the left
>     - Focus that tab
> - Else
>   - Close window
> 
> If the user has 4 tabs, is looking at tab 3, then closes tab 3 I'd expect
to see
> 1   2   4   with tab 4 active
> 
> Closing tab 4 would give 
> 1   2  with 2 active
> 
> Closing tab 2 would give
> 1   with 1 active
> 
> Closing 1 would close the window.
> 
> I am of course welcome to be told that the current algorithm works
> better for most people :)
Comment 1 Tommi Komulainen 2002-10-11 17:37:10 UTC
Duplicate of http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94256
Comment 2 Yanko Kaneti 2002-10-11 17:40:44 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 94256 ***
Comment 3 Marco Pesenti Gritti 2002-10-15 10:38:45 UTC
I dont think this is proposing the same logic of tko bug. You are
proposing go at the next tab when there is one, at previous when there
isnt one right ?
Would you feel tko logic good, anyway ?
If so we can go with that, make sense to me, or at least it's worth a try.
Comment 4 Marco Pesenti Gritti 2002-10-15 10:39:13 UTC
reopening so we dont forget it.
Comment 5 lwillis 2002-10-15 11:39:17 UTC
Tommi seems to be suggesting an algorithm based on "previous" tab, ie
we go to the previously active tab.

For my browsing habits Tommi's suggestion wouldn't be an improvement
over the current implementation (Since in my case they normally work
out about the same!). I think an explanation of browsing habit may be
in order.

I start off with one tab (Think of it as a document containing several
links, e.g. a news site, or a tasklist). I go down the list an open
the links of interest into new tabs, leaving the list still open. I
then move to the first tab I opened. When I've finished on that tab I
close it and *WANT* to move on to the next tab to continue working
through the items I opened, but galeon takes me back to the list (At
this point the current logic and tko's will have had the exact same
effect). So if I had to choose I'd say either implement my logic, or
leave it as it is (I don't think the development of a "Move to
previous" tab would be worth the effort)

From experience with my gf interfaces which are obviously predicatable
are easier to understand. Moving to previous tab (Current
implementation), or moving to next tab (My proposed implementation)
are "obvious" algorithms. Moving to a "random" tab in the last is less
obvious until you realise it's the last tab you worked with
(Especially if you've spent some time away from the tab).

My 2p.
Comment 6 Marco Pesenti Gritti 2002-10-15 14:22:42 UTC
I need to think hard to this. But I guess the only way to clear this 
would be user testing :(
Comment 7 Yanko Kaneti 2002-10-15 14:32:47 UTC
I would think lee should have commented on the tko bug rather than
having two bugs wrt the same issue.  
Comment 8 Marco Pesenti Gritti 2002-10-15 15:22:55 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 94256 ***