On 3 Oct 2014 at 18:40:50, Jeremie BOUSQUET
([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
> 2014-10-03 15:57 GMT+02:00 Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) :
>
> > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:50 PM, [email protected]
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3 Oct 2014 at 15:33:53, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected]
> > > (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 3:28 PM, [email protected]
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3 Oct 2014 at 13:05:08, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) (
> > > [email protected]
> > > > > (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some notes about the proposal:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - I like the 'Add' represented as '+' and after the Wiki/Space/Page
> > > > > > breadcrumb, because is somehow consistent with the '+' (More
> > > > > applications)
> > > > > > from the AppBar. Provides a way to create elements of a particular
> > > type
> > > > > in
> > > > > > the near vicinity where the elements are displayed.
> > > > >
> > > > > What I don’t like is that it’s the only menu entry at the top that
> > > > > wouldn’t have any text (just an icon) and it’s one of the most
> > > important
> > > > > one.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As I said in the proposal "Well known actions are represented with
> > icons,
> > > > while we provide text only for user generated entities
> > > > (Wiki/Space/Page/User names)”.
> > >
> > > But I don’t see this anywhere in the current UI: we have “Edit”, “Add”,
> > > “More Actions..” which are all well known actions...
> > >
> > > Is that a new rule you’d like to have?
> > >
> > > If it is, it makes more sense to me to move all to this new rule at once
> > > instead of doing an exception just for the Add button, don’t you think
> > so?
> > >
> >
> > So yes, is not something existing, it was more of a premise I based my
> > design when I did iterations (in order to assure consistency).
> > For example, one of the iterations looks like this
> >
> > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/FlamingoAddMenuLocationIterations/11.2M.png
> > (where even Edit and More actions are replaced with only icons) ... but
> > again these are design ideas, iterations and proposals.
> >
>
> I really like this one, as it's consistent with your premise and not "half
> consistent”.
Yes I also like it because it makes the UI a bit less cluttered. What I don’t
like is “half consistent”, i.e. just the “+” without the rest using long names.
Now I’m not sure if at this stage we’re prepared to make such a larger
jump/change for 6.2.2. This is why I was proposing to move the Add feature at
the top while keeping the “Add” text for now and do what Caty proposes as the
next step. OTOH if everyone agrees with this change right now, I’m fine with
going ahead with it right now too...
Thanks
-Vincent
> I understand Vincent's point, but my "issue" is that the "+" in top menu
> doesn't look like an icon, it looks like a '+' character, and could use
> same font as the other text on left side (except that it's a bit thicker).
> So it seems half-way between an entity (as it's almost text) and a well
> known action (as it's an icon). This is not the case for the icons on the
> right side of top bar, as they clearly don't look like any character you
> usually produce with a keyboard (bell, message, magnifying glass).
>
> I don't really like the cog icon (and I never did), because if you don't
> know it yet you have no idea what to expect inside (I would except some
> administration or configuration stuff, which is not the case).
> Of course there are habits, but as a first time user, if I tell you "please
> administrate rights of this page", would you click on the pencil or on the
> cog ? ;-)
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > > I’d use a color (the green one looks fine to me to make it visible)
> > for
> > > > > now for 6.2.2 and maybe do some usability testing on various
> > > variations as
> > > > > you did for the other usability tests, in order to gather more
> > > feedback and
> > > > > have more time to gather it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I've also iterated on the 'green color' idea, see
> > > >
> > >
> > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/FlamingoAddMenuLocationIterations/12.1.png
> > > >
> > >
> > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/FlamingoAddMenuLocationIterations/12.2.png
> > > > but I prefer the initial proposal (with white) since I think the
> > contrast
> > > > is better and also we keep consistency between elements.
> > >
> > > I don’t think there needs to be a consistency because we want to draw
> > > attention to it which is not the case for the other elements. That said,
> > > using a “+” without text would be a consistency issue since it’s the only
> > > one like this...
> > >
> > > Anyway, I don’t want to fight too long on this because I’d like us to
> > move
> > > forward so if others are ok to use just a “+” with the same color as the
> > > other menus, then I’m fine (even though I don’t like it). BTW I hope it’s
> > > not too small and can be clicked on a mobile ;)
> > >
> >
> > Actually I would need to make a proposal also for the mobile version, since
> > there things are a bit messed up (because of the Search change) and we
> > might need to provide a custom order.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Caty
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > -Vincent
> > >
> > > > > > - Although I know there will be some initial findability issues for
> > > the
> > > > > > 'Add', after the user founds it I don't think it will have problems
> > > > > finding
> > > > > > it again. We can improve the findability by finally providing an
> > > > > > Introductory Wizard. Except for the initial moments when you learn
> > > > > XWiki, I
> > > > > > don't see the point of having a very distinctive style for 'Add'
> > and
> > > I
> > > > > > would prefer to go on the consistent/integrated with the other
> > navbar
> > > > > > elements direction.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - The same comment about a distinctive style for 'Search'. IMO
> > > 'Search'
> > > > > > should look integrated in the .navbar.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - I dislike the idea of having multiple 'Add' buttons. Also the
> > 'Add
> > > -
> > > > > > Comment to page' and 'Add - Attachment to page' are part of the
> > > Colibri
> > > > > > skin, but IMO were 'close to never' used. I remember a bug on them
> > > that
> > > > > > made them unusable and we discovered it after some years or
> > > something.
> > > > > Also
> > > > > > I don't think we should provide buttons for all the functionality
> > we
> > > can
> > > > > > think of, but leave them be created from their context. I prefer
> > > having
> > > > > > buttons just for the generic and base concepts of XWiki (in the try
> > > of
> > > > > > keeping it minimal and simple).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - We are kind of going a bit too crazy about brainstorming and
> > > ideas. The
> > > > > > only conclusion we need to reach is if for Flamingo we move the
> > > button
> > > > > back
> > > > > > top.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes I agree completely with this. We shouldn’t mix everything right
> > > now or
> > > > > we won’t progress.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only other thing that we may want to have in 6.2.2 too is the
> > > removal
> > > > > of the 2 part-buttons at the top and the introduction of the “Go to…”
> > > for
> > > > > navigation.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I've created http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-11166 and
> > > > http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-11167
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Caty
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The rest is fine to discuss and tune for 6.3+ IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > -Vincent
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Caty
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Eduard Moraru wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Big +1 for Var3 for the simple fact that it looks like a
> > > > > "holistic"/global
> > > > > > > approach that does not only focus on a specific element, like the
> > > "Add"
> > > > > > > button and currently falls into the mistake of making it a bright
> > > shiny
> > > > > > > beacon to misguided users, resulting in something that is overall
> > > > > > > disturbing to the eye. Same can be said about the "Search"
> > element,
> > > > > since
> > > > > > > it now reduces the heavy contrast of both the search input
> > (bright
> > > > > white on
> > > > > > > dark background) and its search button (bright colored blue on
> > dark
> > > > > > > background).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > About the Search button (re: Jeremie): Because it is the first
> > > element
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > its group, it will show to the left and no other elements will be
> > > > > > > disturbed, so the transition will be nice for users. Basically
> > the
> > > > > expand
> > > > > > > search button (the magnifying glass) becomes a button once you
> > > expand
> > > > > it,
> > > > > > > so there should be no flicker or anything like that.
> > > > > > > - As an alternative, if we really are against
> > > > > > > transitions/animations/expandable elements/etc, we could just
> > > present
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > search as directly expanded (classic way), but still keep the
> > > darker
> > > > > input
> > > > > > > color to avoid the "kitch" effect described above due to high
> > > > > contrasts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > About the + (Add) button, IMO, the only thing we could do more if
> > > we
> > > > > really
> > > > > > > want to emphasize it in an *elegant* fashion, would be to make
> > the
> > > +
> > > > > sign
> > > > > > > itself green, or with some green border, whatever. Whatever we
> > do,
> > > we
> > > > > > > should try to consider Caty's opinion on style here since she
> > might
> > > > > have a
> > > > > > > better eye and this proposal here seems to be towards that
> > > direction.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IMO, one very interesting thing to note is the extended (3.4)
> > > version
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > long term view that we also need to take into account and, at
> > > least to
> > > > > me,
> > > > > > > that looks really slick.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think we should stick to the original intent of this Flamingo
> > > skin,
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > the addition of Bootstrap's style, and keep it slick,
> > minimalistic
> > > and
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > the point. The users should focus more on the content instead of
> > > the
> > > > > UI,
> > > > > > > don`t u think?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ------
> > > > > > > On a related note, If you ask me, I would be in favor of also
> > > removing
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > labels from "Edit" and "More actions" and just go with the *all
> > too
> > > > > > > obvious* "pencil" and "cog" icons. GMail uses the "cog" icon
> > with 0
> > > > > > > problems and I kind of trust that their UX army did their
> > research
> > > and
> > > > > > > impact studies for that :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also, on matters of "consistency" we would achieve the following
> > > > > statement:
> > > > > > > "Actions have only icons, while entities have an icon and a label
> > > that
> > > > > > > displays the entity's name".
> > > > > > > - Actions: add, edit, search, more actions, etc.
> > > > > > > - Entities (with dropdown menu for actions on the entries): wiki,
> > > > > space,
> > > > > > > page, user.
> > > > > > > ------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Let's keep this skin clean and a pleasure to work on/with, WDYT?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Eduard
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've created this proposal
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/FlamingoAddMenuLocation
> > > > > > > > Please read it and give your opinion on it. The proposal is
> > > based on
> > > > > > > > discussed solution, but improves a bit the styling.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you are curious how I reached some of the proposal's
> > > conclusions,
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > can see it's iterations
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/FlamingoAddMenuLocationIterations
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Caty
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Guillaume Lerouge
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > actually one thing we could try is this:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - *Keep the "Add" button where it is and use it for
> > > page-related
> > > > > > > > > actions:*
> > > > > > > > > - "Add child page"
> > > > > > > > > - "Add comment" (as suggested by Denis)
> > > > > > > > > - "Add attachment" (as suggested by Denis)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - *Add a "Create" button in the top bar, with 2/3 options:*
> > > > > > > > > - "Create page" (TBD)
> > > > > > > > > - "Create space"
> > > > > > > > > - "Create wiki"
> > > > > > > > > - In this case, after clicking "Create" the user would be
> > > presented
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > a page / modal box listing existing instances as well as
> > > available
> > > > > > > > > templates
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think this would solve both my issues (having less-frequent
> > > > > actions
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > the same location as a more-frequent one, not being in the
> > > right
> > > > > place
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > the page) and GuillaumeD's wife issue (the "Add" button is
> > > easy to
> > > > > find
> > > > > > > > > where it is right now, why move it?).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > WDYT?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Guillaume
> > > > > > > > > ᐧ
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 1:48 PM, [email protected] > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 2 Oct 2014 at 13:31:56, Eduard Moraru (
> > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > (mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > [email protected])) wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On that note:
> > > > > > > > > > > The funny/sad thing to realise is that we are basing all
> > > this
> > > > > > > > > discussion
> > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > the fact that some users did not find the "Add" button
> > > *only
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > time* they tried to do something. The realization is that
> > > this
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > those things (idioms[1][2]) that you learn once and know
> > > how to
> > > > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > > the next 1000x times (like riding a bike).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The real problem appears when you are in those "next
> > 1000x
> > > > > time"
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > find it cumbersome to use (like riding a bike with no
> > > saddle,
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > saddle on backwards :) ). So in both cases (top or middle
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > page)
> > > > > > > > > > once
> > > > > > > > > > > you find it once, you will find it again, however in the
> > > > > middle of
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > page
> > > > > > > > > > > it conflicts too often with the Edit button and other
> > page
> > > > > related
> > > > > > > > > > actions,
> > > > > > > > > > > that it becomes cumbersome to use.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Indeed that’s something I had in mind too. If you just ask
> > to
> > > > > add a
> > > > > > > > page
> > > > > > > > > > and that’s all then you’re not doing a full test. You’d
> > need
> > > to
> > > > > ask
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > user to:
> > > > > > > > > > - add a page
> > > > > > > > > > - delete a page
> > > > > > > > > > - move a page
> > > > > > > > > > - create a space
> > > > > > > > > > - etc
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > And then only you can draw some conclusion IMO.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > -Vincent
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Eduard
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] http://thor.info.uaic.ro/~evalica/hci/L2/
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > https://www.englishforums.com/English/IdiomsVsMetaphors/cqwl/post.htm
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:47 PM, [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 2 Oct 2014 at 11:06:00, Guillaume Louis-Marie
> > > Delhumeau (
> > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected](mailto:[email protected]))
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I have done the "test-on-my-wife" thing :)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > She finds it more intuitive to add a page from the
> > > current
> > > > > > > page,
> > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > current location, instead of the "black bar that
> > gives
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > impression of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > not beeing a part of that page" (that she did not
> > > manage to
> > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > herself).
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I then explained that the buttons inside the page
> > only
> > > > > concern
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > actions
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that you can do on that page, meanwhile adding a new
> > > page
> > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > put
> > > > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > an other location. She did not like this logic :)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > So with this logic we should remove the top bar
> > > completely
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > move
> > > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > > > actions inside the page, i.e. have only 1 menu inside
> > the
> > > > > page.
> > > > > > > > > > Because if
> > > > > > > > > > > > she couldn’t find the Add button there she also
> > wouldn’t
> > > be
> > > > > able
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > > > > > > all wiki-related actions, space-related actions and
> > more
> > > > > > > > importantly
> > > > > > > > > > > > **page-related** actions like copy page, rename page or
> > > > > delete
> > > > > > > > page…
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Also would be fun to ask your wife to try using
> > > Confluence
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > see
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > she
> > > > > > > > > > > > fails to create a page there too.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > > > -Vincent
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Users' logic and developer's logic are not the same.
> > I
> > > > > like the
> > > > > > > > > > current
> > > > > > > > > > > > > location too, except that we should propose "create
> > > page"
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > "create
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wiki".
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I really would like to have some feedback of normal
> > > users,
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > the 2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > proposals. We, as developers, are not good at making
> > > things
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > look
> > > > > > > > > > > > > simple for other people, so we should not take this
> > > > > decision
> > > > > > > > alone.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Guillaume Delhumeau
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
