On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 11:12:56PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > While on the subject, I couldn't disagree more with your choice to make > the gateway page an infolet. The gateway concerns users, the infolets > concern beta testers - most users should never have to see (or even run, > though if it isn't on it's own server that hardly matters) that servlet.
Apart from a couple of minor gripes (unrelated to your criticism), *every single* user has expressed satisfaction with the new interface. The idea here is to have a single extensible system which handles web-based user-interaction. This has the advantages that: 1) The users get a consistent (and pleasing) interface to all GUI functionality 2) Developers have a standard framework within which they can plug-in new UI components Of course, things aren't currently perfect. The original infolet structure was used for diagnostic purposes, and so most of the infolets are somewhat arcane. In time, people will more useful Infolets (such as something which monitors insert progress etc), and we can move thes Infolets under an "advanced" section, or get rid of them completely. Ian. -- Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc. http://www.uprizer.com/ Personal Homepage http://locut.us/
msg03915/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
