On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Nov 28, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Guillaume Lerouge wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'm non-binding +1 for 4) . > > > > I think the 2 most important reasons why I like it better are: > > > > * Easy to use: users are guided throughout the process, one action > > at a time > > > > 2 steps do not seem excessive to me, it's still gonnna be real quick > > and it > > adapts well to the various use cases we are faced with (insert link, > > insert > > image etc). It has both the benefits from the wizard and the > > treeview. I > > think it is a great middle ground between our various proposals. > > You didn't comment on my proposal to be able to click insert on the > first screen if you don't need any option applied to the image. I > think it's reasonable and saves unnecessary clicks. > > Re the guided stuff just one comment: users just need to be guided on > their first usage of it. Thereafter all they need is productivity. See reply in my previous email. > > > > * The dialog size is fixed, action buttons are always at the same > > position > > on screen > > This would work too with option 3. The action button would always be > at the same position. The second/right screen is not about action > buttons, it's about choosing options. > > > => this one is specifically important to me. 480*480 is a good > > medium ground > > between a generic, small-footprint dialog box size that can be used > > for most > > purposes (from a treeview to a file upload) and it would fit well on > > an > > EEEpc 900's screen (which is probably the lowest common denominator > > in terms > > of screen resolutions we should be able to support: 1024*600, > > especially > > given how ubiquitous small laptops are becoming these days). > > > > Having dialog boxes with a consistent look & feel (same location for > > buttons) is very important since it will make user expectations much > > easier > > to manage => the same kind of button always located at the same > > place will > > greatly improve usability. > > Yes, no doubt about this. That's why action buttons are always placed > at the bottom of dialog screens. However having fixed size dialog > boxes is another matter and I don't believe in it. We should do it > when we can but it really depends on the content we need to display. > Forcing a second screen in a wizard fashion is not always good. It's > only good *IF* the second screen is mandatory, if it's not then a > drawer or tabs is a better solution. > > In our case at hand the second screen is optional and this is why a > wizard is not a good structure. Your proposal of having a "more options" button next to the "insert" one sounds like a great way to bridge both approaches. This way, the 2nd screen with complex options is not shown it not needed, which removes complexity. Guillaume > > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Guillaume > > > > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Vincent Massol > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On Nov 27, 2008, at 9:14 PM, Jean-Vincent Drean wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> Re the image selection: > >>>> * It would be much much better to see the images before choosing > >>>> them > >>>> (the preview comes too late). You cannot choose an image on its > >>>> name > >>>> alone that's too hard. > >>> > >>> The only solution I see for this is to have a tooltip with a preview > >>> in the treeview. > >> > >> Couldn't we show the images in the tree (as thumbnails)? > >> > >> In several wikis/CMS I've seen they use a media browser showing > >> thumbnails of pictures and this looks a good way to select the > >> picture > >> to me. If I have to open all nodes to see the pictures below it might > >> be hard to select the picture I want. It might be better to list all > >> pictures found in a given space or wiki (still using a live grid so > >> that performances are not penalized of course). > >> > >> Maybe a checkbox to switch from treeview to image browser? > >> > >>>> * What is the camera icon doing? Is it just an image? > >>> > >>> Yes. > >>> > >>>> * How do I enter advanced parameters for images? > >>> > >>> This mockup is about the wiki explorer, I've put the example of the > >>> image insertion but this part is not to be taken as a proposal. > >>> > >>>> Apart from this it looks good to me but I still have a small > >>>> preference for 3 since > >>>> - as a user I prefer to see all options to understand where I'll > >>>> find > >>>> the feature I'm looking for > >>> > >>> s/user/power user/ > >> > >> Why do you say that? With your argument every user is dumb and would > >> not be able to use a computer at all. Have you every seen a computer > >> OS screen when there's only 1 button and wizards to go to the next > >> step? Come on, look at your screen, and see all the buttons and > >> places > >> you can click (right now when typing this I can see at least 100 > >> locations I can click and I'm on a Mac, reputed for being easy to > >> use). Life is not just a wizard! :) > >> > >> I agree we should not make complex screen but there's a fine line > >> between complex and useful. I even don't disagree with option 4 even > >> though I don't think it's required (unless we wanted to make it work > >> on mobile devices for ex but then it's a completely different skin > >> that we would need and it would be pretty stupid to use a mobile > >> device design on large screens since you'd loose lots of screen > >> estate). > >> > >> Ok back to constructive comments: > >> > >> What about 2 buttons on the first screen: > >> * Insert > >> * More Options... > >> > >> If you click insert you're done and the image is inserted right away. > >> If you click options... then we have 2 possibilities: 1) it opens a > >> drawer or 2) you go to the second screen. In the drawer/second screen > >> you would specify additional stuff like image size, advanced style > >> parameters, etc. > >> > >> It's not as good as option 3 but it's close since you can skip one > >> step by clicking "Insert" right away. Also "our super dumb users" > >> would not see the options immediately so they would not run away :) > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >>>> - it's one click less > >>> > >>> IMHO an extra click is only a problem if the user has to think where > >>> to click and why to click. > >>> I agree that 2 or more extra clicks are a problem but only one, with > >>> the action button always at the very same place, no. > >> > >> I agree it's not a big deal. Still I'm unsure why we need 2 screens. > >> The one argument that seems valid to me is screen estate but then I'm > >> not sure it wouldn't fit (we need to have it work on 1024x768 and not > >> lower since all our site is made to work on 1024x768). > >> > >> [snip] > >> > >> Thanks > >> -Vincent > >> _______________________________________________ > >> devs mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Guillaume Lerouge > > Product Manager - XWiki > > Skype ID : wikibc > > http://blog.xwiki.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype ID : wikibc http://blog.xwiki.com/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
