On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:51, Aleksey Lim<alsr...@member.fsf.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:26:20PM +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote: >> On 07/18/2009 04:17 AM, Gary C Martin wrote: >> >Hi Caroline, >> > >> >On 17 Jul 2009, at 22:14, Caroline Meeks wrote: >> > >> >>We can put it in front of actual kids once you get a sample working. >> >>We could even try playing the video for our existing classes. I don't >> >>know if they'll be able to give you feedback from just seeing the >> >>video. Might be interesting to find out. >> > >> >Yes that's an interesting one... I have more understanding of usability >> >studies with literate adults, where you can have a controlled >> >environment. With the idea that you set goals/tasks to be completed with >> >the interface and ask the user to vocalise what they think they are >> >doing ("I'm clicking this because I think it's the search button..."). >> >You only interact with them once they are clearly stuck, to help them >> >get back on track. Asking for any-ones opinion is usually frowned upon >> >in usability studies, as opinion is almost always different from actual >> >behaviour – but some opinions are better than nothing, which is why I >> >keep asking :-) >> > >> >Perhaps I should work with Walter and Aleksey's initial toolbar code and >> >make an identical test clone of TA but with the new toolbar design (I >> >can use Aleksey's Write mock-up code as an example)? Then you could let >> >the class (or a random selection of the class) use it for some tasks and >> >watch how well (or not) they manage with the new interface? >> > >> >Simon: have you used TA yet in your lessons? >> >> Yes, the problem is, that I won't get into class before September >> again - we have summer holidays :/ >> >> About the design - as already noted, the current implementation does >> not match gary's mockups. I think the mockups are more consistent in >> using icons in the primary toolbar. Having the text entry field >> (activity name) present, could help the users that know Sugar >> already. They would not feel that much lost. >> >> Can we get mockups for Browse? I would do the changes then there. >> >> When doing testing we should maybe do tests for people that have >> used Sugar before already, and probands with no knowledge of Sugar >> at all. >> >> Regards, >> Simon >> >> Btw: I was lost a bit with that the canvas is only shifted down when >> the toolbar is locked. But I guess it makes sense, in order to have >> not shifting the canvas down when you search for an option and >> pulling down the different toolbars. Not sure, yet. >> >> > > I guess we should create and approve policy for new activity toolbox. > And start apply this policy at least for fructose activities. > > In my mind key points are: > * should we restrict activity authors about what widgets can be placed > to activity toolbox > * should these restriction be soft(e.g. having only Close button) or > hard(e.g. toolbox should have only standard buttons and buttons to > open activity specific toolbars) > > Simon: do we have similar infrastructure for policies like for features > on Features/* wiki pages? If not I guess its a worth-wile idea.
Maybe the HIG would be the best place? http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Human_Interface_Guidelines Regards, Tomeu > -- > Aleksey > _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel