[Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx>]

Douglas Pratley wrote:
> > 2.) Packet Details / Copy item (only one Copy item in this menu):
> > Description
> > ------------------
> > Bytes (Offset  Hex  Text)
> > Bytes (Offset  Hex)
> > Bytes (Printable Text Only)
> > ------------------
> > Bytes (Hex Stream)
> > Bytes (Binary Stream)
> >     
> I agree that it would be good to combine the Copy / Copy Selected Bytes
> menu items. I didn't for the first cut as I didn't want to interfere
> with existing functionality.
>   
Ack, keeping a contribution as simple as possible is a good idea - but 
now we're already in the second round ;-)
> Is "Description" the right phrase? I find it vague, but can't think of
> anything better.
>   
Same problem I had. I also just don't know a good and suitable name 
here. Anyone else?
> These items do something different to the ones from Menu (1); they copy
> only the selected bytes. That is why they are "inconsistent" at the
> moment. I agree that it is ugly to have them different, but is the
> context of having a row within a packet enough to make it intuitive on
> its own?
>   
I guess so. This is a *context* menu, so it's ok in my eyes that the 
same entry at different places will copy different parts.

BTW: I disagree that "these items do something different". They copy the 
currently selected bytes in both cases, only the amount is different, 
namely corresponding to the selection.
> > 3.) Packet Bytes / Copy item:
> > The usability of this menu is completely odd, as you select 
> > things you don't want.
> > With the new Details menu the dialog menu is completely 
> > obsolete - after some cleanup. Namely moving the "Export 
> > Selected Packet Bytes" item to Packet Details menu (shouldn't 
> > be too difficult?!?). We might also want to remove this 
> > export feature completely, as I guess that the "Copy" 
> > mechanism is what users really need ...
> >     
>
> Again, I was reluctant to change existing functionality; I think that we
> should either drop the Copy and move the Export as you suggest, or else
> duplicate the same Copy and Export functionality across both pop-ups
> (either should be easy).
>   
As the functionality doesn't work nicely in the Bytes pane, I'd vote to 
just remove it. We can add it later again if someone is shouting "foul" 
loud enough ;-)
> The question is, is there anybody out there who is going to be upset if
> we remove this functionality (or more accurately, move it and rename
> it). I'd value a third opinion!
>   
Well, removing *might* be a problem. My observation over the last years 
of Ethereal / Wireshark development is that anything that is changed, 
there's someone who will dislike it, regardless what your doing.
> > BTW: Is the "Printable Text" a good idea? Wouldn't the "common" 
> > replacement of unprintable chars by dots be more common / 
> > helpful? Or is there even a need for both?
> >     
> Don't know - quite possibly both -  I actually think we could probably
> do with more advanced functionality that copes with unicode text (UTF-8
> and UTF-16) as well. Steve F suggested being able to decode Base64 would
> be useful. I hope that this patch will give a better baseline for all of
> that if anyone gets the time to do it.
>   
Ack, having a basic "copy" mechanism is a good idea. Don't know if an 
UTF-8 will work nicely on Windows, but that needs further investigation.
> I'm tempted to leave it for a few days to let my documentation patch
> work its way through and to let others comment (they've been quiet so
> far); if they stay quiet I'll then implement your suggestions.
>   
I guess, the first comments you'll get is when the 0.99.6 is released in 
a lot of weeks ;-)

Regards, ULFL