llDialog, Ruined now w/EXTRA crap.

What is the point in the Owner having to be mentioned at the top of the dialog.

I think that both lines at the top of the dialog should be removed and made so you only see the text provided by a script.

An idea proposed by Lestat Llewelyn is to: add an whois button next to the ignore button.
Thraxis Epsilon: Question mark in the dialog corner perhaps?

My personal idea would be to have ALT text when you hover your mouse of the body of the dialog that shows the owner.

The new dialog system completely ruins my dialogs I have worked on making nice and prim and proper for months. Please change this back before the next release.

well i must disagree a bit. i like the new dialog kinda..
well can add maybe group name if object is deedet.. but other then that i think its great.

on top of this really being pointless, in my case all of my players have to be deeded to a group if the land is deeded to a group. Because its then owned by a group, you either see (???) (???)'s or you just see simply 's

Now personally, this makes me look like i can't script a simple dialog menu. Which in turn isn't gonna be good for business.

And I agree with chad, whois would be better then simply stating who or what group owns the prim that the dialog menu is comming from.

I havent looked at my dialogs that I use very much hard core in my products
I will be very indeed "TICKED OFF" if they are crapy now.. Too many changes
have caused me to have to compleatly rewrite too much code as it is now .

Yet another brilliant waste of resources that should have been spent on many other things...

This is a frivilous implementation to fix ignorance... If a random Dialog comes to you, & YOU give it your perms. Then it's YOUR fault for being stupid...

I don't understand the purpose of this new dialog "feature". What sparked this Development?... I personally think they need to fire the Dev team that thought of this one. Time for some new, fresh, vibrant, blood that won't let this type of 1/2 working crap be implemented anymore...

They need to stop with the numerous updates which they do to appease us & actually fix some more serious issues at hand...

Maybe just like the "Ignore" button, an "Info" button would have been more appropriate.

*Throws L$0.02 at you, cause this one isn't even worth USD. =(


P.S. Thanks for getting the "Show Updates" working AGAIN though. =)
(That is an example of something useful actually fixed.)

I've got to say that I don't think this is particularly intrusive. Just testing the dialogs on my skates and, really, it's hardly noticeable to be honest. The question mark is a good idea though, less intrusive for those who have a problem with the lines at the top yet easy enough for somebody to see where it's come from if they're unsure.

The previous implementation was a massive security issue, if you'd like to know how, IM me for details. It was absolutely necessary.

However, that being said, perhaps "Script Dialog" could be removed from the top.. that seems a bit redundant now. Also, the dialog could hang a little lower on the screen possibly.

Last I checked, your skates didn't have 8 buttons plus some status reports in the dialog, though, Moopf Some of my vehicle scripts do. Or, did until yesterday...

But I do agree that the change was vital. It was just poorly thought out: The new message should have replaced "Script Dialog". And not being able to return group ownership right seems like a bug... it should work. Groups literally do own the object, so...

Then you should probably check again The ice skates dialog boxes have anything up to 9 buttons and, especially on the random selection dialogs, there's also quite a bit of text which does scroll now, but it's not a major issue to me.



I agree about the Script Dialog line, which does seem a little superfluous. But it's a quick cludge I guess (as are a lot of things around here!)

It does look a bit awkward. Not horrible, but it could be better. Why not give dialog menus a title bar, like a normal GUI window, and put it in there, so that the text doesn't require the user to do more scrolling than they had to before? It would look great and improve usability on menus that have enough text that you'd need to scroll.

Pfffft. What do skates need buttons for? I'm still using the ones I got at Taigh's birthday party a year and a half ago

Options I like giving options

I'm sure such a well thought out poll will get the Linden's attention

haha! hey i was tired and stunned when i saw it. i guess i could have been more diplomatic but i was shocked!! omfg! LMAO

Y'know...

...I think I'll survive this.

It'll be hard, but somehow I'll pull through.

What sparked it? Ummmmm, us.
A number of residents have been asking for this for a while now - I, personally am glad to have it.

I agree that the developers have erred in not increasing the size of the dialog box to accomodate the extra lines, but that looks like the sort of unfortuanate oversight that occurs in development every day. I predict it'll be fixed in the next release (which we can probably expect quite soon thanks to LL's new frequent, small release policy).

Ease up, guys - The world is not ending just yet.

I agree that something to identify was needed...

What I am refering to is the half-ass implemented things being handed to us. Your going to honestly look at this implementation & say it was tested thoroughly before being put in? As I, & many others personally see it, a more vigorous testing phase should be done before actual implementation of "features".

Doing so:
1. Decreases the resources used by all of us ranting etc..
2. Makes sure it actually works fully first, ??????? is an un-acceptable return.
3. Forsee bugs/problems & fix them before it being put in.

This was a bubble gum patch to something we all wanted, could have been done alot better & tested more thoroughly before implementation for backwards compatibility. Plain & simple...

Oh come on, it's hardly the end of the world, is it? The function still works - the only issue is that people might have to scroll down to see all of your displayed text now. They should have put an extra line in maybe, I'd prefer that, but, you know, nothing's actually broken.

And there was definitely a potential security issue there (or at least a user confusion issue).

My first thought on seeing this change was "Oh good... now if some griefer is pushing a lot of crud out from some un-named object, their name will be all over it."

However, I have to agree that the intent may have been good, but the implementation is flawed. Apparently it does it with all scripted objects that create dialogs, and not just ones with a default name of 'Object'? Or is the problem that most designers, rather rationally, I might add, only bother to name the root prim of a linked set of prims, while they may have scripts in multiple parts of the set, including some that have the default name?

I rather like Chad's suggestion. Add an unobtrusive "whois" button to the resulting dialog. It takes less space, and if you are ever uncertain what caused that dialog to pop up, you can click on the whois button to see if the source is one you trust. And make sure the function is fixed so it can show the creator and the owner, even if the owner is a group.

With so many issues out there that desperately need to be fixed, it is difficult to see why this task got the time and attention, rather than, say, the texture issues that make everything grey...

That's a good thing.



For my own experience, that's just me being lazy. It's no grand conspiricy.



Development in any software company is departmentalized. The UI programmers do not (as a rule) do rendering work, the rendering guys do not (as a rule) do network issues, etc. Heck, they might not be anywhere near qualified to do (other task). So time spent on a UI issue does not automaticly detract from, say, tracking down a network or rendering bug, like the gray textures issue.

Better, I think, would be to simply keep the number of AVAILABLE lines the same and make the dialog box bigger.

While it's not the end of the world, it causes problems for most of my dialogs. Like most scripters, I design the dialog text to ensure that all important text is visible *without* scrolling. Now that the last 2 or 3 lines are bumped down, important text is hidden.

I'm happy that users see this new info in llDialog, but... it could have been added in better way. Maybe remove the "Script Dialog:" title, since it's obvious that it's a dialog from a script. And expanding the dialog by an additional 3 lines would help.

Cubey is right. Ditch the "Script Dialog" line completely and simply make the icon for script dialogs look different. In the very least, please give back the two lines we lost.

While I'm thinking about it, here's another suggestion: You could change the behavior of NULL buttons. For example:

llDialog(key, str, [""], chan);

Instead of the script complaing about "all buttons must have label strings", why not just display a greyed out (blank and unclickable) button?

That would allow us to design dialogs where button positions don't move about when features are unavailable. Currently, I have to place " " buttons that are actually clickable and do nothing just to keep my buttons formatted consistently.

Has anyone heard back from the Lindens about this issue?
Will they fix it or are we redoing all our menus??
Do we need to make a vote proposal?