> Eric: I despair of ever getting any feedback
> on the work I have done on the gui.
Alain: I understand and I sympathize with you, Eric,
but unfortunately this lack-of-feedback is a chronic
problem in our group. Several of Uli's contributions
scarcely elicited more than a thank you. My first
collaboration system was totally ignored, and the
second one was highly criticized. I am confident that
it is not a lack of consideration that makes us act so
badly. For one thing, it's a division-of-labour thing.
Anthony on the Interpreter, Uli on the file-format, me
with the collab system, etc. One person can only do so
much. In conclusion, I am sure that the main reasons
why feedback is sorely lacking is due to a lack of
members, and the lack of time of each one of these
busy members.
> I have not gotten a single comment aside from
> 'well I do not like it' - with no explanation:
> the background of the properties icon should be
> white and its font should be chicago.
Alain: It is often easier for people to tell you what
they don't like, especially if they don't have any
ideas to counter-propose. It's human nature too, you
could say, to focus on the bad and take the good for
granted. Sometimes we even express distaste for
something without being able to express why. Shrug!
> Any way I would like to hear from people who have an
> opinion - it is not really fair to criticize the
> existing gui without offering constructive
> alternatives ...
Alain: This is perhaps the crux of the problem, Eric.
People are not commenting because commenting at
length, and proposing constructive alternatives in
particular, implies a lot of work ... work which
should indeed be done by those who preoccupations are
centered on the GUI. Conclusion: There just aren't
enough participants whose are focused on the GUI.
> You can I suppose guess why I am not rushing to
> draft another partnership or license agreement.
> I do not like to waste my time drawing up projects
> to watch them gather dust (remember the partnership
> skeleton I circulated?
Alain: As a matter of fact I do. My recollection is
that we commented this thoroughly. Furthermore, even
though no agreement was enshrined, we made a lot of
progress in both these regards.
> Eric: I need feedback on the UI because there is
> no sense 'improving' something only to
> find out 'hey, on an IBM it looks like $41+.'
Alain: What you need to do, Eric, is to find someone
who will work in close collaboration with you, every
day, so that you build upon each others ideas ...
until such time that you have a coherent set of UI
elements to demo. A little bit of this, a little bit
of that, doesn't aptly convey your design philosophy.
> Eric: if you or Alain could upload the stacks
> I sent that would be really appreciated.
Alain: You latest attachment "mctools" is corrupted
all of a sudden. I don't know why. It was working
yesterday. But I did check out some of your previous
work. SEE my comments below.
Alain: The hopefully constructive alternative that I
propose, Eric, is that we try to achieve the same look
& feel as HyperCard. Same windows and dialogs. Same
menus. Same everything. Then we proceed from this to
evolve it into the HyperCard-compatible FC-GUI. My 2nd
suggestion is that we encourage HyperCard list-members
to test it, but only once we substantially have a
HyperCard-like interface for them to try.
---------
Variable Watcher stack:
The window is too small. Why not display local and
global variable at the same time? Two independently
scrolled fields for varNames and varValues is not a
good idea. The "?" and "!" and "p" are obtrusive. They
should be grouped together into a popup or a menu.
Field Properties stack:
The header/box of the "Style" area masks part of tabs
of the area above. The right edge of last tab is
masked out. Why is "show border" checkbox boxed-in?
The "Button ID" field is not relevant for fields. 12
radio buttons is far too many. It should be a popup
instead.
The organization of the "script" pane is pretty good.
The Accelerators pane lacks balance/symmetry though.
And, despite the apparent lack of space for another
tab, the "Custom properties" stuff does not belong in
the "Icons+" pane.
Color scheme:
Why yellow button on white bkgnd? The yellow
background for toolTip fld is not pretty either. Why
is the "font.." button dark-grey? Why is the "show
name" checkbox green? Why is the "3D" checkbox blue?
Why is the "lock location" checkbox in the "script"
pane red? Why is the "script.." btn in the "script"
pane blue? Why are the "Choose.." buttons in the
"icons+" pane light-blue?
I suggest as does Apple's "Human Interface Guidelines"
that you prototype the GUI in black-and-white, then
add colour with parsimony, strictly where it is
justified.
Miscellaneous:
The icons viewer/navigator is pretty good, but a full
window of many-icons-at-once is more useful and
quicker than a one-by-one sequential approach.
The "easel" stack is much too 'busy'. It has to breath
more. Spacing is a very important element in design.
It increases readability. It reduces eye-strain, and
cognitive overload too.
That's what I really like about menus: they hold a lot
of choices, you only have to see them when you want
to, and they collapse back into a very small area.
---------
I hope you made it this far, Eric. Sorry for being so
brutally honest, but that's the way I am. Life is too
short to beat around the bush. I hope you understand.
Alain Farmer
mailo:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
