Bug 88741

Summary:

[search] Working Set... menu item should appear after MRU working set items

Product:

[Eclipse Project] JDT

Reporter:

Nick Edgar <n.a.edgar>

Component:

Assignee:

Martin Aeschlimann <martinae>

Status:

RESOLVED FIXED

QA Contact:

Severity:

normal

Priority:

CC:

dirk_baeumer

Version:

3.0

Keywords:

usability

Target Milestone:

3.1 M6

Hardware:

OS:

Windows 2000

Whiteboard:

Attachments:

Description	Flags
Screen shot	none

Description Nick Edgar

2005-03-22 09:47:44 EST

build I20050315

In the References, Declarations submenus, the Working Set... menu item often
appears intermingled with the MRU working set items.  It should appear after
them, at the end of the menu, for consistent positioning that leverages the
user's motor memory.

Comment 1 Nick Edgar

2005-03-22 09:47:55 EST

Created attachment 19077 [details]
Screen shot

Comment 2 Dirk Baeumer

2005-03-23 11:41:12 EST

The Working Set... currently appears before the MRU list. The three entries on
top of Working Set... aren't working sets. However, the user might not know the
difference.

We show the filter... in the package explorer's view menu at the end as well.

Comment 3 Martin Aeschlimann

2005-03-23 12:04:06 EST

I would suggest to add a separator after 'hierarchy', then the working set
instances and then 'working set...' at the end. Dirk?

Comment 4 Nick Edgar

2005-03-23 12:18:26 EST

> The three entries on top of Working Set... aren't working sets.

Right.  "Duh" on my part.

I think a separator to delimit the working set section would help.
However, I still think the 'Working Set...' item should go at the end, since
when I'm scanning it's like: "Is the one I want I want in the short list?  No,
then choose Working Set...".  Putting at the end would be consistent with other
places (New, Show View, Open Perspective).

Comment 5 Dirk Baeumer

2005-03-23 13:16:16 EST

+1 for the separator and Working Set... at the end.

Comment 6 Nick Edgar

2005-03-23 13:33:27 EST

> I still think the 'Working Set...' item should go at the end

Sorry, I see now that's exactly what you were proposing.
+1.

Comment 7 Martin Aeschlimann

2005-03-24 05:05:36 EST

fixed > 20050324