On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 11:09:06PM +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > > > You again. > > Yes, me. I was told by some members of this list only a few days > ago that sarcasm was OK.
Where did I say I would have problems with sarcasm? But the use of sarcasm doesn't make your comment any bit more insightful. The 'You again' refers to your strange elitism and the discussion we had. With regards to widgets, I stated that requiring the user to read documetation in order to use a widget is not an option. It was especialy about visualizing / hinting at functionality. The fan-sliders without the fan graphics would give no hint at their special behaviour at all. The user doesn't see anything of it, can hardly expect there's something hidden, has no reason to even look at documentation. I wonder how anyone could argue with that. > If there *is* some documentation, I see no good reason why it > shouldn't be read. Unless the user thinks of himself that he's > so bright that he will understand everything instantly. Educated > people usually are a bit more modest, and don't mind some effort > in order to learn something. What would be so bad about an app providing such good usability that users of average brightness can understand everything (not necessarily instantly, but still in short time by themselves)? Educate people like to spend some time reading documentation instead of using stuff right away? --- Thorsten Wilms
