On 31/01/2012 23:09, Lex Trotman wrote:
Confusing the user is also harm. A (paranoid) user may worry some other file
got truncated.
Ok, better put the filename in the message then, but preventing the message in the case where it is probable that actual harm has been done is really bad.
It would still confuse the user. Why tell the user something worrying that may well not be the case?
BTW do you agree/disagree with:
When writing to a networked file I would expect users to take more notice of error messages, i.e. they should expect a save error might cause truncation.