Personally thought the new pages were a vast improvement on the old ones in terms of finding what I need. Usability is in the way the user thinks, I suppose.
On 28 April 2010 15:11, Josh Roesslein <jroessl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah one improvement may be to place the API "hurl" tool into each API > documentation page > with all parameter pre-filled so it is ready to be experiment with to see > how the responses look. > This also helps avoid out of date info if the responses should change. > > Josh > > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Taylor Singletary < > taylorsinglet...@twitter.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the feedback, Jonathon. We're working to address all these pain >> points on an ongoing basis. >> >> Taylor Singletary >> Developer Advocate, Twitter >> http://twitter.com/episod >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Jonathon Hill <jhill9...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> The new dev.twitter.com website that launched at Chirp a few weeks ago >>> is very nice and attractive but there are several major usability >>> issues: >>> >>> * The new API documentation does not provide return values of the API >>> calls. The old wiki provided this information, along with usage notes >>> that are not present either on the new site. >>> >>> * It is difficult to look up API endpoints required for a given type >>> of functionality. If you don't remember the exact endpoint to look >>> for, it can be frustrating trying to find the right one. This would >>> easily be fixed using a more descriptive list of endpoints, and/or >>> more visual contrast between headings and list items. >>> >>> * I tend to overlook the endpoint description in the blue header >>> section. My eyes expect it in the white area below. Please move it, >>> and make it stand out more. >>> >>> * The Supported formats, Supported request methods, Requires >>> Authentication, and Rate Limited sections use up an awful lot of >>> vertical space on the page unnecessarily. Making each one of these a >>> heading also dilutes the visual hierarchy on the page and takes away >>> from more detailed and important information on the page, from a >>> reference standpoint. I think these would be more effectively >>> presented as a list under a "Metadata" heading, or as a small table. >>> >>> * The API console is very restricted without login and registration of >>> an app. I think this is a mistake. Login should be required only for >>> those calls that require authentication. >>> >>> * The API console would be much easier to use if there were parameter >>> hints for each call on the page somewhere. Prepopulating the parameter >>> list would be awesome! >>> >>> These are all things that have been kindof in my face as I've tried to >>> use dev.twitter.com in my day to day development work. I would be >>> delighted if you would address these issues. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Jonathon Hill >>> Company52 >>> http://company52.com >>> @compwright >>> >> >> >
