Closed Bug 240384 Opened 21 years ago Closed 13 years ago

"Tools | Page Info" should be moved to "View | Page Info"

Categories

(Firefox :: Menus, defect)

Product:
Firefox
Component:
Menus
Platform:
x86
All
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
trivial

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: ryukbk, Assigned: rogerio.rag)

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

The second version to this bug reviewed by db48x.
2.60 KB, patch
shorlander
: ui-review-
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040410 Firefox/0.8.0+ Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040410 Firefox/0.8.0+ While in right-click context menu "View Page Info" is beside "View Page Source", in the main menu, Page Info is under Tools menu, and it's inconsistent UI. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: Expected Results: "Tools | Page Info" should be moved to "View | Page Info" beside "View | Page Source".
a) this is a dupe b) why is it inconsistent? Page Info qualifies as a tool based on what you can do with it. Its not just a properties page.
(In reply to comment #1) > a) this is a dupe > b) why is it inconsistent? Page Info qualifies as a tool based on what you > can do with it. Its not just a properties page. I'm not sure what's the definition of "Tools" (especially when "Save As" in Page Info doesn't work because of a bug). Anyway even DOM inspector can be moved under "View" menu as "View DOM", but it will be inappropriate because you can edit DOM with it, if you think it's the characteristics of Tools. Then you can't edit and change state of page info with Page Info menu, other than saving (copying) its elements to disk. Isn't it "View" rather than "Tools"? Anyway my assumption is strongly based on the fact that right-click context menu has "View Page Info", so you feel absolutely nothing about it, I have nothing to say more.
(In reply to comment #1) > b) why is it inconsistent? Page Info qualifies as a tool based on what you > can do with it. Its not just a properties page. Well, then why "Page Source" is under View? You can do Print and other things with it, it's not just a source view, so it can be under Tools :)
This menu placement is as designed.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Asking for reconsideration. If the context menu says View Page Info, then it makes sense that the menu item is under View.
Status: RESOLVED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
I would think that the developers decided to use it as a tool. I say we ask developers...
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
If "Page Info" is a tool then shouldn't the context-menu call it "Open Page Info" instead of "View Page Info". The word "view" seems to be associated with the *attributes* of a webpage and hence the ability to *view* them. As in the sentence "view the page source, or reload the view". "Open" seems more appropriate for a tool as in the sentence, "open the extensions window".
(In reply to comment #7) > If "Page Info" is a tool then shouldn't the context-menu call it "Open Page > Info" instead of "View Page Info". How about simply "Page Info" and "Page Source" in the context menu? Wouldn't that solve all inconsistencies and keep everyone happy? (wishful thinking I know) Is the choice to put Page Source in the View menu based on existing convention alone?.. I'm not objecting to it outright, as it's every web developers habitual tendency to go straight for the View menu to check the Page Source, but it does seem to me that it would actually do better being in the Tools menu, as it doesn't directly modify the display of either FF GUI or the page being viewed (whereas all other items in the View menu do) and it does seem more of a Tool for developers than average users anyway. My preference if things were to be changed, would be to have both items in the Tools menu and remove any reference to the word View in the context menu items for consistency and simplicity.. anyone else agree?
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > If "Page Info" is a tool then shouldn't the context-menu call it "Open Page > > Info" instead of "View Page Info". > > How about simply "Page Info" and "Page Source" in the context menu? It's inconsistentt with other verbs in the menu (Bookmark... Save... Select...)
I was all ready to submit a problem report because Page Info was not in the View menu with Page Source like it had been in Mozilla Suite, and yet the two of them were together in the right click menu on the page content, and then I found this problem report. I would like to see them both together in a menu, because I use them and think of them as being together -- they're about the the same thing. I agree that the Tools menu is the appropriate place and vote for putting them both there. I thought Page Info had disappeared from the menus until I read this problem report and will probably keep looking for it in View for some time, until I get my thick brain reoriented. Please put them together in Tools.
This really should be fixed as whichever way you look at it, it's inconsistent atm. I think they (page source and page info) should both be in "View" because page info is just another way of viewing the page (like viewing the source or the rendered page). The only thing 'tool-like' that I can see is the ability to save images which is hardly its main purpose.
Assignee: firefox → nobody
QA Contact: bugzilla → menus
Bump! This report hasn't had much activity recently. I also believe that "Tools | Page Info" should be moved to "View | Page Info". I've tried to get some interest going on this issue at http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/browse_thread/thread/2f45895725d58411/ http://wiki.mozilla.org/Talk:FX2_Visual_Update/User_Interface_Design#Firefox_menus:_move_.27Page_Info.27_from_.27Tools.27_to_.27View.27_menu I had a postive response to this idea in the newsgroup. I believe it would be quite easy to make the update and have it included for FX v2.0.
One more vote... I had been right-clicking the page to access this menu item because until I found this bug, I didn't even see that "Page Info" had been moved to the "Tools" menu. It would make sense to put "(View) Page Source" and "(View) Page Info" in the same place. It would have taken less time to fix this than to discuss it for 2 and a half years. Maybe Bugzilla should have an additional "Fix Complexity" or "Impact" drop-down so that although the severity is marked "trivial", it wouldn't matter since the fix is also trivial.
Now Page Info is under revision, i think that a new release (3.0), with a new page info look, could be the right time to move a bad positioned item to another menu. As said context menu has -------- View Page Source View Page Info -------- and the View menu should consequentially have Page source and Page info The revise of Page Info will/can include this? What does revision author Johnathan Nightingale think about this?
This seems to be more about blinkered developers politics than about user-friendly design. I still can't get the point of that "everlasting" discussion about such an unimportant issue that could be fixed in an instant instead of expatiating it to infinity. And that is not restricted to this particular issue, to my utmost regret! Shouldn't a browsing tool be suited to the demands of the users? Or did I miss the IPO of Mozilla?
(In reply to comment #4) > This menu placement is as designed. That would never fly at my company. A bad initial design isn't an excuse not to go back and do it right. I could say almost any bug of mine works the way I designed it. There's a blurry line between design and code anyway.
Oops, I was about to file a bug about "View Page Info" missing from the menus. While searching similar bug reports I found this one AND the "View Page Info" menu. I did not know that it was "hidden" under "Tools". I expected it to be below "Page Source": View... Page Source Page Info
As of Firefox 10, I see "Page Info" in one menu, and "View Page Info" in another.
I agree with Daniel. I did the modification. How can I submit this modification for review?
Attached patch Patch to this bug. (obsolete) — — Splinter Review
Assignee: nobody → rogerio.rag
OS: Windows XP → All
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #583910 - Flags: review?
Comment on attachment 583910 [details] [diff] [review] Patch to this bug. Review of attachment 583910 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Looks good, from a technical perspective. However, the old-style menus aren't the only game in town any more. Throw a copy of the menu item into the Web Developer menu as well, so that View Page Info shows up next to View Page Source there as well.
Attachment #583910 - Flags: review? → review-
Incorporating the suggestions of the revision made by Daniel.
Attachment #583910 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #589466 - Flags: review?(db48x)
Daniel, I thing that replication of menu items isn't a good idea. The web developers may access these items (View Page Info and View Page Source) from View menu. This is only my opinion.
At first, I also thought that View Page Source and View Page Info should be under View, for the obvious reason. However, when I look at what menu items are under View actually, they are not about opening up something new for viewing, but about controlling how the web page and other things in the window should be viewed: zoom, character encoding, toolbars, etc, they all modify the existing view of the web page or of the window. Therefore, I believe View is not the right place for View Page Source/Info to be under. How about under File? I think it's a nice organization to put everything that mainly "does something about the current page" under File: save the page, send the page, print the page, view the page source, view the page info (which is almost equivalent to "Properties" in the standard Windows term, which certainly belongs under File), etc. ("File" should probably have been "Page" in the first place, but maybe it's too late for such a significant change now.) I don't see the clear distinction of what belongs to tools and what doesn't (everything is a tool in some sense, anyway), and the Tools menu is so crowded with items because many add-ons just add their menu items under Tools. (In my Firefox, the menu takes the entire vertical space of my laptop screen when opened.) It's becoming almost synonymous to "Etc." or "Misc." or "Leftovers". I believe the menu structure could be much clearer if we left Tools for only those controlling the overall application behaviour, as Options, Sync, Private Browsing, etc.
Comment on attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review] The second version to this bug reviewed by db48x. Before we move forward with implementation review, we should decide whether we really want to do this. I'm not sure it's worth changing this around at this point, but the UX team might disagree. You can ask for their input using the ui-review flag, or by finding someone in #ux on IRC.
Attachment #589466 - Flags: review?(db48x)
Comment on attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review] The second version to this bug reviewed by db48x. Review of attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Before making his review, Gavin has suggested to ask for your opinion on this change.
Attachment #589466 - Flags: ui-review?
Comment on attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review] The second version to this bug reviewed by db48x. Hello Rogério, For ui-review requests, you can set the requestee to the ux-review email address. You can see the new instruction page talking about this at https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Developer_Guide/Requesting_feedback_and_ui-review_for_desktop_Firefox_front-end_changes
Attachment #589466 - Flags: ui-review? → ui-review?(ux-review)
Comment on attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review] The second version to this bug reviewed by db48x. Review of attachment 589466 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- While there are some platform differences here (Windows tends to overload View more) the View menu generally contains two types of things: 1) Which UI elements are shown and different types of UI configurations: toolbars, sidebars, tabs-on-top, rulers, fullscreen, split screen, mini-player, etc. 2) How the application content is displayed: zoom level, page style, icon view, list view, etc. Occasionally there is a less well defined third area: 3) Actions that affect content but don't fit anywhere else: stop, reload, arrange icons, scroll-up, scroll-down, etc. I agree that the Tools menu has a tendency to become an overloaded "Misc." in practice. However "Page Info" doesn't really fit with the rest of the things that you would find in the View menu. It is definitely more of a Tool the way it is currently designed.
Attachment #589466 - Flags: ui-review?(ux-review) → ui-review-
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago → 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
I disagree with Stephen Horlander in comment #28, and I agree with Seungbeom Kim in comment #24. The 'File' menu is a good place to receive Page Info and Page Source options. After all, there are a lot of options in file menu related with actual rendered page (save as, send address, print preview, ...). Page Info option is like "File | Properties" in commons applications packages.
(In reply to Stephen Horlander from comment #28) > I agree that the Tools menu has a tendency to become an overloaded "Misc." > in practice. However "Page Info" doesn't really fit with the rest of the > things that you would find in the View menu. It is definitely more of a Tool > the way it is currently designed. By the same argument, View Page Source is also more of a tool that few users would ever need. But the "WONTFIX" means that they'll still be in separate menus. I'm curious how much time was spent talking about this over the last 8 years vs. how much time it would have taken to just admit the mistake and fix it.
(In reply to Quatrix from comment #30) > (In reply to Stephen Horlander from comment #28) > > I agree that the Tools menu has a tendency to become an overloaded "Misc." > > in practice. However "Page Info" doesn't really fit with the rest of the > > things that you would find in the View menu. It is definitely more of a Tool > > the way it is currently designed. > > By the same argument, View Page Source is also more of a tool that few users > would ever need. But the "WONTFIX" means that they'll still be in separate > menus. I'm curious how much time was spent talking about this over the last > 8 years vs. how much time it would have taken to just admit the mistake and > fix it. "Page Source" is a sub-item of "Web Developer" which is under "Tools". So they are in the same location, that location just isn't "View".
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: