[mythtv] [mythtv-commits] mythtv commit: r13275 by stuartm

[Bruce Markey]

Dan Wilga wrote:
> At 4:02 PM -0700 4/19/07, Bruce Markey wrote:
>> You mention New Titles but that is absolutely one entry per
--------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> title. I've never heard of most of the titles (which is the
>> point, of course) so there is no reason to think that I would
>> want to sort alphabetically to look up a title I've never
>> heard of or didn't expect =). What's most important is to see
>> what is coming up today that I may want to record before it's
>> too late. I've never sorted the what's new list by title other
>> than playing around and looking at the title sort for the heck
>> of it. I do often hit "1" again to get a reverse sort by time
>> to see what new titles were added in the last mfdb run.
> 
> What I generally do is look at the New Titles and Movies lists every 

I look at the what's new list almost every day which is why I
wrote it. Even if I hadn't, I'd be familiar with what is or isn't
included in the list by now. And even if I didn't notice, if the
person who wrote it told me that there is one entry per title,
I'd pay attention to that rather than continuing to misrepresent
the facts to someone who knows better =).

> week or two and schedule anything interesting to be recorded. I don't 
> care when it's on, and I definitely don't want to see the same thing 
> listed five times.

If you find something "listed five times" on the New Titles
page then define a reproducible test case. You are wrong on
this point and reiterating it only damages your credibility.

>  Of course I can press "2", but why should I have to 
> if I always use the list the same way?

Because of the explanation that I took the time to type for
your benefit on this trivial point. You've neglected to
acknowledge the downside of sorting different pages in a
different way which is my main concern. Simply avoiding the
issue doesn't make for a persuasive argument.

> I am not trying to say that my use patterns are typical, but I also 
> don't think you should assume yours are, either.

Unlike yourself, I'm making no such assumption. The point is that
any user, regardless of habits, should understand and trust
what they are seeing every time they enter the page regardless
of what they are searching for, how they got there or what they
did last time.

>>> So, what about storing the settings separately for each search type?
>>
>> John Poet had sent the original patch that lead to this and
>> he had different pages sorted differently and the emphasis was
>> that there would be one "unique" entry for each title and less
>> emphasis on sorting alphabetically. It struck me that any list,
>> regardless of it's origin, could/should be viewed by the user
>> either way. Having one consistent behavior for the proglist page
>> would be less confusing and more useful than a set of quirky
>> exceptions.
> 
> I think you misinterpreted my suggestion.

Your assertion is incorrect. I read what I am replying to before
I reply and I know you were suggesting that the previous sort
order could be retained per search type. The paragraph above
mentions John's original patch and the conclusions that I drew
while seeking the best solution.

>  I was not proposing that we 
> come up with different sorting defaults per search page. I agree that 
> this would be quite quirky.

As stated, I agree.

> Instead, I was proposing that we store the last used sort method 
> (time/title) and sort direction separately for each search page. That 
> way, when the user returns to New Titles, it would default to whatever 
> sort method they last used there, and when they return to Movies, it 
> would default to whatever sort method they last used on that page.

But this would be even quirkier. Say one member of a household
wanted to list the subtitles of all the upcoming "Star Trek: The
Next Generation". Later another member of a household looks up
the upcoming episodes of "Dancing With the Stars" and only sees
one entry. The consequences of this misunderstanding may be that
there could be a request to remove that thing from the living room
or possibly sleeping on the sofa in front of the said myth box.

>>> Yes, it's a little more work, but I do agree that it would be more 
>>> intuitive. I'd be willing to write this patch if it will be accepted.

I will not accept a patch that makes the initial proglist
view inconsistent.

>> I don't know what you mean by "more work".
> 
> I only meant more time to write the code, because it would mean defining 
> two settings strings per search page, instead of the single pair in my 
> current patch.

Although it was ambiguous, I assumed that is what you meant
but you've not yet acknowledged that my point is that even
though the code is trivial, it is a bad idea. You are focusing
on the fact that you want to see the Movies list sorted by
title. You are ignoring the fact that anyone, you or I included,
could misunderstand the result set especially in cases where
there is one title (or very few titles) with multiple showings.
It may not be obvious what the sort order is and that there may
be more showing available. Therefore, it is important that the
proglist always starts from a view where all showing are listed.
The user should know and trust that that is what they are seeing.

If you want to see a title sort you only need to press "2". If
the page is sorted by title, you would still need to press "1" or
"O" again to see the showings for a title. There is no credible
labor saving to justify making the behavior any more obscure in
any way. Not even close.

--  bjm