Per our discussion on IRC (below), we could introduce 'sorting/
ordering' as part of a search action. I.E A user performs a query,
then has a dialogue/option to sort the query results based on a few
specific parameters (relevant to the search results). As Mimi
comments, this will leave the allow consistent headers across views,
and only require that the query results interface allow sort tabs.
For queries that provide different types of results (i.e tasks,
events, etc), we could potentially group the items by type, then
allow sorting for attributes common to each group or limit it to the
'lowest common denominator' (this needs to be thought out more).
Comments?
-a
<hamstar> okay
<ashk4n> hamstar: agreed
<ovaltofu> but from a ui standpoint, some people are going to find
it easier to
'explain' why some things can be sorted and not others
since they all look
alike
<ovaltofu> err, harder
<hamstar> yes, we will have to address that next
<ashk4n> ive often wished i could just run regex or sql in table
based displays
<ashk4n> but thats besides the point :P
<ovaltofu> or a lucene query :)
<hamstar> we may just not sort at all...and offer something like:
<hamstar> sort by: from, to, received, starts etc...
<ovaltofu> yeah, that could solve it
<hamstar> a smattering of 5-6 common attributes to sort on across
the top
<hamstar> but i think this is even secondary to getting the columns
to display the right
metadata :)
<ashk4n> yep. or even as an 'advanced' option when doing a query
<ashk4n> so search -> advance -> query string.. check a 'sort by'
checkbox
<hamstar> ooh nice
<hamstar> yes, that's the right order
<hamstar> query to narrow the options and then sort to zero in on
what you want
<ashk4n> yep. only for power users
<hamstar> hey ashk4n, can you write that up and send it to the
design list?
<hamstar> not even sure if it's a power user thing
<ovaltofu> or have lucene sort by relevance
<hamstar> i think it'd be useful to everyone, but the sort by
widgets wouldn't appear
until you searched
<hamstar> relevance could be one of the options
<ashk4n> yep
<hamstar> that way our column headers will be consistent across
views. they won't sort
in either table or calendar :)
<ashk4n> and someway to convey that if u want to 'sort' without a
query
<ashk4n> then u enter blank query?
<hamstar> it could be a view setting
<ashk4n> (and just click the sort options)
<ashk4n> ok
<hamstar> dunno
<ashk4n> yep
<hamstar> there might be room for them to be there all the time
<ashk4n> use the same dialog box for view settings as for adv search
<hamstar> oh i don't know that the adv search would need to be in a
dialog box
<hamstar> it could just grow above the table, that way the results
are connected to the
query and sort widgets
<ashk4n> s/dialog box/something not always shown
<hamstar> ok
<ashk4n> k. will respond
On Jun 2, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Mimi Yin wrote:
Absolutely, I'm not disputing the importance of any of the
scenarios Ashkan and Dennis have brought up:
The questions at hand are:
1. Do users need to sort on the generic attribute types: 'Who' and
'Date' in the summary table view, columns which will display a
different attribute depending on context. For more background, see:
+ http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-June/
004797.html
+ http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-May/004778.html
That's the thing that's hard to do that probably doesn't have very
much meaning to the user.
2. Even if we did decide that sorting on 'Who' and 'Date' was
important, is it more important than:
+ Performance
+ Getting the default 'Sort order' of the Dashboard view right
+ Getting the Communications status, Who and Date columns to
display the right context sensitive attributes, so people know what
they're looking at in the first place
+ Finding information via Search/Filtering
Not supporting sort on 'Who' and 'Date' isn't mutually exclusive
with sorting on a specific attribute.
Examples of sorting by specific attributes we could support:
+ From: , Sent by:, Created by:, Edited by:, Updated by:
+ To:, CC:, BCC:
+ Date received (a la mini-calendar interaction described in my
first email)
+ Start date
However, I wonder if for the use cases described below,
intelligently sectioning a list of items would be a better
affordance than sort for scanning lists of items.
e.g.
+ Sectioning by time: Today, Yesterday, This week, Last week, Past
month, etc
+ Sectioning by email recipients, which would allow a single item
to show up in multiple sections.
For example:
-- 1 section is defined as: To: Bill B
-- Another section is defined as: To: Jill J
-- An email that was sent to both Bill B and Jill J would show up
in both sections.
Most importantly, can we all agree that what's hard for us to
support and maybe not so useful to the user anyhow is sorting by
columns defined around generic attribute types, e.g.:
+ Sort by 'WHO' which could be any of the following: From: , Sent
by:, Created by:, Edited by:, Updated by:, To:, CC:, BCC:
+ Sort by 'DATE' which could be any of the following: Date sent,
Date received, Start date, Tickler date
Mimi
On Jun 2, 2006, at 12:47 PM, Dennis Lynch wrote:
I think Chandler absolutely DOES NEED SORT.
I know of hundreds of places where I will use it:
1. I don't want to have to create a new filter
2. I don't want to have to look for that filter I already created
(among the 200 filters I have
3. The spam filter is imperfect, plus, I am conservative and don't
want to have false positives, so I sort my email by subject, and that
helps me quickly see a bunch of spams that passed through the spam
filter. I also sort by sender sometimes to do the same.
4. When I am reviewing my list of tasks, I want to look at them in
some meaningful sequence- high priority, medium, low, on-hold,
completed, cancelled... OR, due today, due tomorrow, due in 2 days,
etc... OR project 1, project 2, project 3
5. I want to see all the emails from Bill-B, then all emails from
Edgar-E, then all emails from Judy-J, and I don't want to have to
keep
unfiltering and re-filtering.
6. I want to see all the tasks I finished last month, sorted by week
7. I want to look at all the tasks I have coming up, sorted by
estimated time requirement, OR sorted by additional resources
needed..
OR sorted by person requesting. OR sometimes by 2 or 3 attributes at
once.
8. I hope I don't have to go on...
I surely hope that the need for sorting.. along many attributes, and
within many parts of Chandler are quite clear. "Click on the Column
heading" ("click again to reverse the sort order") would seem to be a
"standard" way to do this in the UI.
Thanks
--
Dennis Lynch
dmlynch [at] alum.mit [dot] edu
dmlynch1 [at] gmail [dot] com
Make email more useful by using Labels in your subject line:
IMPT- important message
INFO - general information
JOKE- self-explanatory
QRY- an unsolicited query/question
REPL- reply to your message
URGT- urgent message requiring immediate attention
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
