Simon P. Lucy wrote:

>
>The number of different types of file icon is quite small, and easily
>remembered by the user after some small amount of use. 
>
I may not be typical, but I have many more different file system icons 
than favicons.

> It also means an
>entirely different thing.  It means I can use this file with the
>application that uses 'this' icon.  Whereas a bookmark icon means what?
>The icon belonging to some site, or the owner of that site.  Where is the
>semantic connection with the actual bookmark and the icon?  
>
I think you might be surprised how little distinction users might make 
between these two scenarios.  In each case, they have an icon that they 
may recognize as referring to the context where they first saw or 
created the content.  When they click it, they know that they will see 
the contents represented by the icon within that context.  Remember, 
these are the same users that make no distinction between browser chrome 
and web content.

>How likely am I to remember amongst hundreds of other bookmarks what a
>particular icon is supposed to mean, 
>
Very likely, since your brain is quite good at quickly analyzing, 
distinguishing and matching graphical patterns.  Why do you claim above 
that remembering file system icons is easy, yet now contend that 
bookmark icons are hard?  

>and then for all of the icons that are from the same site how am I to differentiate 
>between the different bookmarks?
>
 Having lots of bookmarks for the same site is probably not the typical 
case, but as you said in a recent post, "The user has the option of 
titling any and all bookmarks to make them understandable..."

>Its a feature which seems to be of use at first glance, that at greater
>thought seems useless except as an advertising medium. 
>
Well, my thought must surely be lesser, because it seems to be of use to me.

> If that is its intent then say so, but don't pretend it really increases useablilty 
>because in actual use it really won't except in those small cases where the user 
>would remember the actual site anyway because it was so important.
>
Pretend?  Why do you assume that statements you don't agree with are 
lies?  Please allow for the possibility that other people actually 
believe something you don't, even if you won't allow for the possibility 
you could be wrong.

Peter


Reply via email to