Re: [Design] Design details

[Aaron Wolf]

On 11/02/2015 06:53 AM, Stephen Michel wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Aaron Wolf  wrote:
>> On 11/01/2015 05:54 PM, mray wrote:
>>
>> Hello Everybody, based on the discussions in IRC about
>> responsive/mobile-first implementation of snowdrift.coop there are
>> some new mockups! I also updated the landing page and the project
>> pledge button area a bit. Please open a new thread for comments on
>> that. Only reply for the responsive parts in this thread please.
>> 
>> https://github.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/tree/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/current
>> (v37) (I renamed "Discover" to "Browse" since Discover and Search
>> are too close.) What did I miss? What is not going to work? What
>> can be done better - and how? Looking forward to feedback, Robert 
>>
>> This is a new thread for the design details notes. Some items:
>> progress is neat looking overall. I like the better image of crowd of
>> characters instead of the grid that looked too much like a statistical
>> graph of some sort.
> 
> Agreed, this is more human.
> 
>> Regarding the more forest look and the city in the distance, it's got
>> some good elements. I think the trees are a bit too stylized to figure
>> out what's going on, what they are. They don't have enough tree-like
>> features. I wish I could express this more clearly, but I like the
>> direction and yet it just needs something different to make it easier
>> to immediately recognize what we're seeing. I still would like to have
>> more of a bank of snow on the side of the road, maybe both sides, just
>> a better sense of dimension where one can get the idea of the
>> snowdrift more clearly, like how my drawing on the current live intro
>> has a sense that there's some high snow right up close. What you have
>> is already better though vs before.
> 
> I somewhat see where you're coming from. I think it only applies to the
> further out trees, though. I think the mobile design captures a sense of
> path very well, better than the full desktop site. What if we removed
> the trees on the edges from the desktop site, too?
> 

I agree that it works better on mobile in this case. There's something
about the way the further out trees look that doesn't work.

I like the idea of both the forest not being 100% covered in snow and of
the forest mostly being further off in the background, not crowding the
foreground. Sorta like these:

http://cdn.paulkirtley.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Snow-machine-drop-off.jpg

http://www.watercolour.tv/images/product/zoom_Paint_A_Snow_Scene_with_distant_forest___PART_1_1.jpg

> 
>> I think "Join us in setting the world free!" mostly detracts from the
>> slogan since it is the same sort of message but just more wordy and
>> different. I also think the "Let's clear the path" text is redundant
>> to the button text (and I like 'Let's clear…' better).
> 
> Agreed. I DO think this is worth discussing at this stage since the
> existence of a text block or not changes the design. Not worth
> discussing particular wording (in general) though.
> 
>> I think we should reconsider the existence and details about the big
>> landing page button. I've never really liked a wordy button that says
>> "how we clear the path". And the "how it works" thing is prominent
>> enough now in the navbar.
> 
> Second. I admit I'm not familiar with research in this area but my
> intuition is that more people will read the contents of the front page
> than click a link, no matter how prominent it is. Therefore, I'd rather
> see us put a very brief description with a prominent 'learn more' or
> 'continue reading' link.
> 
> This also opens us up to adding, at some later point in time, more
> different sections with different 'learn more' buttons if Snowdrift ends
> up doing more than fundraising.
> 
> Aside: I still can't get used to calling us, the organization,
> "Snowdrift.coop." So I call the organization Snowdrift and if I need to
> talk about the software, I specify that I am doing so.

That's not how human cognition works. The way to get comfortable talking
about the organization as "Snowdrift.coop" is to do it. Avoiding talking
about it is actually what mostly is reinforcing your discomfort. I have
experienced this myself on numerous times, I know what it's like to have
something in your mind just feel like a framing is wrong, like when I
first heard there was a programming concept called "a closure". It is
specifically by accepting the term and using it that you get
comfortable. The organization is called "Snowdrift.coop".

> 
>> The thing I think I'd like to see is some sort of indication about the
>> metaphor that gets at "what is the snowdrift dilemma?" or something
>> like that, where the "how it works" part describes our solution, and
>> the key item we otherwise are pointing people to is about getting them
>> to recognize the problem in the first place.
> 
> Agreed but I'm also not sure it 

Re: [Design] Design details (was: Re: responsive / mobile first (mockup update))

[Stephen Michel]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Aaron Wolf  wrote:



On 11/01/2015 05:54 PM, mray wrote:

 Hello Everybody,

 based on the discussions in IRC about responsive/mobile-first
 implementation of snowdrift.coop there are some new mockups!
 I also updated the landing page and the project pledge button area a
 bit. Please open a new thread for comments on that.
 Only reply for the responsive parts in this thread please.

 
https://github.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/tree/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/current


 (v37)

 (I renamed "Discover" to "Browse" since Discover and Search are too 
close.)


 What did I miss?
 What is not going to work?
 What can be done better - and how?

 Looking forward to feedback,


 Robert



This is a new thread for the design details notes.

Some items: progress is neat looking overall. I like the better image 
of

crowd of characters instead of the grid that looked too much like a
statistical graph of some sort.


Agreed, this is more human.


Regarding the more forest look and the city in the distance, it's got
some good elements. I think the trees are a bit too stylized to figure
out what's going on, what they are. They don't have enough tree-like
features. I wish I could express this more clearly, but I like the
direction and yet it just needs something different to make it easier 
to

immediately recognize what we're seeing.

I still would like to have more of a bank of snow on the side of the
road, maybe both sides, just a better sense of dimension where one can
get the idea of the snowdrift more clearly, like how my drawing on the
current live intro has a sense that there's some high snow right up
close. What you have is already better though vs before.


I somewhat see where you're coming from. I think it only applies to the 
further out trees, though. I think the mobile design captures a sense 
of path very well, better than the full desktop site. What if we 
removed the trees on the edges from the desktop site, too?




I think "Join us in setting the world free!" mostly detracts from the
slogan since it is the same sort of message but just more wordy and
different. I also think the "Let's clear the path" text is redundant 
to

the button text (and I like 'Let's clear…' better).


Agreed. I DO think this is worth discussing at this stage since the 
existence of a text block or not changes the design. Not worth 
discussing particular wording (in general) though.



I think we should reconsider the existence and details about the big
landing page button. I've never really liked a wordy button that says
"how we clear the path". And the "how it works" thing is prominent
enough now in the navbar.


Second. I admit I'm not familiar with research in this area but my 
intuition is that more people will read the contents of the front page 
than click a link, no matter how prominent it is. Therefore, I'd rather 
see us put a very brief description with a prominent 'learn more' or 
'continue reading' link.


This also opens us up to adding, at some later point in time, more 
different sections with different 'learn more' buttons if Snowdrift 
ends up doing more than fundraising.


Aside: I still can't get used to calling us, the organization, 
"Snowdrift.coop." So I call the organization Snowdrift and if I need to 
talk about the software, I specify that I am doing so.



The thing I think I'd like to see is some sort of indication about the
metaphor that gets at "what is the snowdrift dilemma?" or something 
like
that, where the "how it works" part describes our solution, and the 
key

item we otherwise are pointing people to is about getting them to
recognize the problem in the first place.


Agreed but I'm also not sure it needs to be on the front page. I think 
the front page needs an emotional appeal (done) and the shortest 
reasonable summary we can give.


Anyway, the "Inkscape recieves" numbers don't make any sense to me, 
but

we'll have accurate numbers when we have the live site working.


Agreed this is weird. The way it's currently arranged, I expected those 
numbers to mean, "If you pledge, Inkscape will receive $467.86 more. Of 
that, 84 cents is directly from you and .12 cents is matched by 
others." Obviously that's not what it is, I just wanted to explain what 
positions I expected what numbers to be in.


I do think there is value to showing inscape's current income stream, 
and also how much total your pledge will add to that.



Mostly, looking great!


--
Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop 
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design