> > > I switched mhttpd to use the new javascript based run start and stop pages.
> > 
> > One initial complaint: the transition.html page doesn't seem to deal well with a frontend program using
> > a deferred transition.
> >
> 
> We now have a test frontend for deferred transitions, and this problem will likely be fixed.
> 
> > 
> > I separately still think that the transition page should automatically go away after 5 seconds
> >
> 
> This is a user-interface philosophy issue.
> 
> Instead of using personal preferences one should follow established design principles
> (there is research done and books written about this).
> 
> I did not recently look at current recommendations for this type of interaction, but generally
> one expects web pages to "do things" (such as switch to a different page) only when directed
> by user input (press a button).
> 
> My personal opinion is that half the users will find 5 sec delay too slow, the other half will
> find 5 sec too fast and the 3rd half will wonder "what happened, the web page flashed and disappeared,
> did I miss something important, how do I get back to whatever is was?!?".
> 
> One idea is to implement the transition page as a implant on the state page - after the "start" page
> you go back to the status page where you can see the progress of the transition. After the transition
> completes, it's progress window "collapses" into a "success/failure" display with a link to the full
> transition page to see any details of what happened. Any volunteers? (I would html-ize the status page first).
> 
> K.O.

I agree with Konstantin's plans and volunteer for the "collapsable" display. We will address this during my next visit to TRIUMF.