In other words: lock screen only works when ĺock screen after'is set to 'Screen turns off'.

I don't think Comment 1 is true.

Here is how it works: the "Blank screen" setting in the power panel determines when we consider the user session idle. At that time, we do blank the screen. The 'Lock screen after' setting in the privacy panel determines for how long after the screen blanking you can get back to your session without having to go through the unlock dialog.

If you need to lock the screen without waiting for the user to go idle, you can always use C-A-L to lock it explicitly. We will still blank the screen, though.

Thanks for your quick reply, however it's not that easy.
On the interface in the 'Brightness & Lock' panel it's clearly called 'lock screen' not 'blank screen' and even if it was to be a 'blank screen' it's still not working.
I will get no blank/ lock screen when I choose a idle time setting.
Nothing will happen.
In the 'Privacy Panel' you mentioned, there is no setting which has anything to do with screen settings.
Also in the 'Power Panel' there are settings for suspend mode no screen settings.

Are you sure we're talking about the same OS and/ or window manager?
(Ubuntu 13.04/ Gnome 3.8.1)

(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't think Comment 1 is true.
> 
> Here is how it works: the "Blank screen" setting in the power panel determines
> when we consider the user session idle. At that time, we do blank the screen.
> The 'Lock screen after' setting in the privacy panel determines for how long
> after the screen blanking you can get back to your session without having to go
> through the unlock dialog.
> 
> If you need to lock the screen without waiting for the user to go idle, you can
> always use C-A-L to lock it explicitly. We will still blank the screen, though.

Thanks for your quick reply, however it's not that easy.
On the interface in the 'Brightness & Lock' panel it's clearly called 'lock
screen' not 'blank screen' and even if it was to be a 'blank screen' it's still
not working.
I will get no blank/ lock screen when I choose a idle time setting.
Nothing will happen.
In the 'Privacy Panel' you mentioned, there is no setting which has anything to
do with screen settings.
Also in the 'Power Panel' there are settings for suspend mode no screen
settings.

Are you sure we're talking about the same OS and/ or window manager?
(Ubuntu 13.04/ Gnome 3.8.1)

I agree with the idea presented in this bug report.

It's really confusing to understand the functioning of the lock screen and off screen, considering that "appear" independent functions are housed in different panels in the control center.
I consider it an error that the lock screen option, depends on off screen (when this is an option to "never turn off")

Example of error:

1. I address the privacy panel, active "automatic screen lock" (5 minutes).
2. Now I turn to the panel of "energy" and the option to "turn off screen" choose "never." (you can also choose an option more than 5 minutes)
3. Wait five minutes ... nothing happens

Expected results: activate the screen lock after 5 minutes (without the screen off).

I tried this, and I wanted to use my computer as "table clock", listening to music and cleaning my bedroom.

I understand that the locking system running Gnome derived from smartphones and tablets, but mostly Gnome installed on desktops and laptops, which partially or completely or can be connected to a power source whose power and locking options can be independent and customizable (in smartphones and tablets the energy saving is a priority).

I guess this error results from the unclear presentation of the options (eg on Windows you can activate an option that refers explicitly to request password after the screensaver activates). Another explanation for the confusing options, is to understand the lock screen (no prompt for password) as a screensaver (which displays the time and notifications so beautifully). This option I think should be included, this screen (desktops and laptops) can not be missed.

(In reply to comment #5)

To which I said earlier, most a conceptual idea of how it could work (in my opinion).

a) Existing functions "lock screen" and "turn off screen", must be independent.
b) In the panel of "privacy", rename "lock screen" to "security" or "Lock computer".
c) "Lock Screen" (no password) is enabled by default.
d) In "security" can handle the time to "lock screen" (1 ', 2', ... ever) and the type of security (password yet, but in the future may be PIN or other system). Then, when you open the panel of "privacy" options will be displayed: "lock screen", "type safety" (password, PIN, etc.) or off (which currently displays "on" / "off".) In option "Security"
e) The "turn off screen" in the panel "energy" keep their options time (they must be the same as showing "lock screen".
f) The options "lock screen" and "turn off screen" do not conflict (downtime of the "turn off screen" is => (equal or greater) to "lock screen".
g) By default, the idle time to turn "turn off screen" is the same as "lock screen" (suggestion 5 minutes) → This keeps current operation (running at the same time, like a smartphone or tablet)
h) If you choose a "type of security" (eg password), in "lock screen" option disables the "never" in downtime.
i) The "block" user menu depend on the "Security" on the panel of "privacy". (show screen lock with or without security, regardless of the "turn off screen")

The idea is to continue with the metaphor of mobile devices and the current operation, but with the guarantee to customize these options.

I hope you understand and is just an idea.

thanks

OS: fedora 19 (Rawhide)
Environment: GNOME 3.8.2

I think it is clear by now that the fact that screen locking and screen blanking are not independent is not a bug, but an essential part of the current design.

You can disagree with this design, of course, and can try to convince the designers to revise it. But this sort of open-ended design discussion is really best outside of bugzilla.

(In reply to comment #7)
> I think it is clear by now that the fact that screen locking and screen
> blanking are not independent is not a bug, but an essential part of the current
> design.

OK, I understand you say it was designed that way. However, the fundamental error is that it is understood that the "screen lock" works after the monitor turns off. That could at least discuss it.


> You can disagree with this design, of course, and can try to convince the
> designers to revise it. But this sort of open-ended design discussion is really
> best outside of bugzilla.

First of all, the performance I observed in "lock screen" was a bug (because it was not brought out an action configured in the Privacy panel). Now you tell me it's not a bug and is part of the design (and also have to explain how it works), I could say that I disagree with the design.

If I thought there was a bug, I had not commented on in GNOME Bugzilla.