My comments come as a trained human engineer and 'tool maker'. 1. People called upon to do 'work' do not usually have an opportunity to love their work and to love the tools with which they must work. Some of us are fortunate enough to have the discretion of choosing our work and the implements that we need to do that. Even so, "hating" an implement of work does not necessarily reflect the effectiveness, or efficiency, or quality of productivity of that tool for its intended purpose.
2. The "roll and scroll" software tools are in certain specific cases substantially superior to all other alternatives. When users of that type of tool design express 'hatred' for "roll and scroll" (R&S") it may be that that design choice was not appropriate for the task at hand. If a system chooses to use R&S exclusively, as did DHCP, then one should expect to find that R&S is used wrongly in many cases in such a large system as DHCP. The presence of these instances does not in any way serve to discredit the basic value of R&S interfaces in appropriate instances. 3. The difficulties of interaction with VistA (DHCP as well) can be frequently traced to design features of these software tools that have nothing to do with the basic User Interface that has been selected. However, if one isn't aware of the second order design features in a given software tool it is easy to indict the first order feature--in this case the R&S technique. Then, as the discussion drifts onto the first order technique, R&S for example, one is carried away from the important cores issues. 4. The ideas of form and function fitting the task in industrial engineering apply equally to the design of software tools, such as "register a patient", "enter a new prescription", "make an outpatient clinic appointment", or "assign a bed". I know DHCP, and VistA in its turn, were largely fashioned by programmers who were not formally prepared to do the industrial and human engineering involved in their work. Where VistA/DHCP has excelled, those programmers filled that gap by application of their own talents, or by learning more about that aspect of their work. There are many excellent examples of this in Vista/DHCP. Regards, Richard. P. S. It is said that a master craftsman is one who knows at least 3 ways to abuse each of the tools used in that craft. As program design and development, and computer language use can also be regarded as a craft, then some among us have achieved the status of "master". The VA FileManager as a tool set comes to mind, with George Timson as the Master Craftsman. Unfortunately, many of those who crafted DHCP/VistA were not aware of the many abuses of the tools that they committed in that process. RGD. ================================================================== > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 09:57:38 -0500 > To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] 20th century (VistaWeb Missing Apps) > > My point of view is that of a total non-MUMPSer. I know next to nothing > about M, and less than nothing about FileMan. I know a lot about the RPC > interface since that's my schtick. I know most users hate the roll and > scroll. I know it ain't easy interacting with VistA. If VistA didn't have > these faults I would probably be as happy as a clam with it. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games. How far can you shotput a projector? How fast can you ride your desk chair down the office luge track? If you want to score the big prize, get to know the little guy. Play to win an NEC 61" plasma display: http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20 _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
