just my 2 cents: One of the most challenging issues is balancing dev to market time with usability that truly meets the needs of the target audience.
"Idiot-proofing" comes to mind as vital, yet to the extent that it can be done in deliverable time-lines. Stripped out admin is something I ALWAYS go for. Sure, it's cool to have a Java WYSIWYG admin interface, but is it NECESSARY? Rarely if ever. Sure having the Admin mirror the look of the site may give a warm-fuzzy to the site owner, usually at a dev time cost unjustifiable. Help docs and admin systems are often filled with a plethora of developer terminology. Too often it's "assumed" the user "should" know x or y. To the point where that concern doesn't even cross the developer's mind. Why give a site owner an OOP based admin system that inevitably requires training them on OOP vocabulary, logic and reasoning, when you can give them a plain HTML form with checkboxes, radio buttons and drop-down menus? I've yet to see justification for that when the end-client is main-stream business owners with no desire need to learn more than basic "click here" mentality. Of course, if the client hires us to provide a truly scalable, robust solution that is flexible to the nth degree, that is when OOP admin may make sense. Anything else, no way. From my limited experience, this all arises out of a myopic understanding of best practices from the developer standpoint - ego and analytic thinking disallow the developer from stepping fully enough into the shoes of the user. Again, just my limited experience and soapbox opinion... At 01:05 PM 7/10/03, you wrote: >This is not a new question, however, IMHO, it won't >hurt to talk about it again. > >In my view, some assumptions are made by developers >when they think of an application's usability, for >instance, for data validation, when a developer's help >doc says something like "You need to enter an integer >for this entry/field", the assumption is that the user >knows what an integer is (any one who went to primary >school knows what an integer is). Now, one may argue >that "You need to enter some number for this >entry/field" may sound easier to average user's ears. >I would beg to disagree here. "Some number" could be >728, or it could be "728.25" while the later would >fail because the data type is set to INT. > >Secondly, I think presentation and usability are >closely tied together, and depending on the nature of >the application, presentation may need to be highly >polished or it need not to. For instance, a fancy car >web site, presentation is certainly very important >while a data admin application/utility for just two or >three users does not need fancy presentation at all, >e.g. http://68.32.61.40/datadata/DataMan.cfm > >What's your thought(s)? > > >Li, Chunshen (Don) > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
