"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Send U2-Users mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of U2-Users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. UI standards (Susan Joslyn)
2. Re: UI standards (Edward Brown)
3. Re: UI standards (George Gallen)
4. Re: UI standards (Symeon Breen)
5. Re: UI standards (Jeff Schasny)
6. Re: UI standards (Dawn Wolthuis)
7. Re: UI standards (Bill Brutzman)
8. Re: UI standards (Dawn Wolthuis)
9. Re: UI standards (Rex Gozar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:33:12 -0400
From: "Susan Joslyn" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID: <000301cb21be$64c70ae0$2e5520...@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Good morning.
In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
standards?
When I google around I find an immense amount of information. Accessibility
standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs so
your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published standards
regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands of
search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or in
some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological studies
about what colors to use, for example.
If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another - how
much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that this
is, after all, a new interface?
Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always. But
what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and now
those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users really
want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from anyone?
Susan
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:17:15 +0100
From: "Edward Brown" <[email protected]>
To: "U2 Users List" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<ba2f7087c5e55f4cb14ec12d9bee354503850...@svr-email-1.civica.root.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I've seen the custom look & feel developed as a way of gaining product
differentiation - something 'shinier' for the demos. But for me, when it
comes to developing a non-terminal UI on top of unidata for your typical
business application, I would always recommend going with the UI
guidelines for the target platform. There's nothing worse (imo) than
non-standard interfaces - they as often as not look clunky when they're
first developed and quickly fall behind as the operating system is
updated, as we're seeing now with xp/vista/win7 and to a lesser extent
Mac, Linux etc.
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Susan Joslyn
Sent: 12 July 2010 13:33
To: [email protected]
Subject: [U2] UI standards
Good morning.
In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
standards?
When I google around I find an immense amount of information.
Accessibility
standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs
so
your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published
standards
regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands
of
search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or
in
some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological
studies
about what colors to use, for example.
If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another -
how
much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that
this
is, after all, a new interface?
Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always.
But
what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and
now
those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users
really
want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from
anyone?
Susan
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail and any attachment(s), is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the
addressee, dissemination, copying or use of this e-mail or any of its content
is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please
inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail, any attachment(s) and any
copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted
by law. It is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any
attachment(s). Unless otherwise stated (i) views expressed in this message are
those of the individual sender (ii) no contract may be construed by this
e-mail. Emails may be monitored and you are taken to consent to this monitoring.
Civica Services Limited, Company No. 02374268; Civica UK Limited, Company No.
01628868
Both companies are registered in England and Wales and each has its registered
office at 2 Burston Road, Putney, London, SW15 6AR.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:26:35 -0500
From: George Gallen <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<6d57ef06d84b5541af530227504bb68f5c56d81...@34093-mbx-c06.mex07a.mlsrvr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Keep in mind that fancier, is not always better. First you will need to
determine what information you
need, then look into UI that gather this type of information.
If your using a gui interface, using drop down boxes/radio buttons to
standardize selections is best
and text when least possible.
Keeping in mind that switching from keyboard to mouse and back really slows
entry down.
Funny, how we all hate the green screen entry, but at the same time, writing a
UI, esp a GUI to do the
same thing as easier/faster as the green screen is very difficult.
Just because the UI may be outdated with current "looks", doesn't make it
obsolete or non-functional.
to the OP, why not involve in the users on what they would like, or how they
think the current interface
could be improved to suit them better.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:u2-users-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Edward Brown
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 9:17 AM
> To: U2 Users List
> Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
>
> I've seen the custom look & feel developed as a way of gaining product
> differentiation - something 'shinier' for the demos. But for me, when
> it
> comes to developing a non-terminal UI on top of unidata for your
> typical
> business application, I would always recommend going with the UI
> guidelines for the target platform. There's nothing worse (imo) than
> non-standard interfaces - they as often as not look clunky when they're
> first developed and quickly fall behind as the operating system is
> updated, as we're seeing now with xp/vista/win7 and to a lesser extent
> Mac, Linux etc.
>
> Ed
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Susan Joslyn
> Sent: 12 July 2010 13:33
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [U2] UI standards
>
> Good morning.
>
>
>
> In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
> standards?
>
>
>
> When I google around I find an immense amount of information.
> Accessibility
> standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
> published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs
> so
> your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published
> standards
> regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through
> thousands
> of
> search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or
> in
> some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological
> studies
> about what colors to use, for example.
>
>
>
> If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another -
> how
> much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
> compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that
> this
> is, after all, a new interface?
>
>
>
> Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always.
> But
> what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations -
> and
> now
> those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users
> really
> want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
>
>
>
> Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from
> anyone?
>
>
>
> Susan
>
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
> This e-mail and any attachment(s), is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the
> addressee, dissemination, copying or use of this e-mail or any of its
> content is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended
> recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail,
> any attachment(s) and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded
> to the fullest extent permitted by law. It is your responsibility to
> scan or otherwise check this email and any attachment(s). Unless
> otherwise stated (i) views expressed in this message are those of the
> individual sender (ii) no contract may be construed by this e-mail.
> Emails may be monitored and you are taken to consent to this
> monitoring.
>
> Civica Services Limited, Company No. 02374268; Civica UK Limited,
> Company No. 01628868
> Both companies are registered in England and Wales and each has its
> registered office at 2 Burston Road, Putney, London, SW15 6AR.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:26:59 +0100
From: "Symeon Breen" <[email protected]>
To: "'U2 Users List'" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID: <012d01cb21c5$e8b15200$ba13f6...@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You are right there are accessibility standard esp for internet resources,
but no real de facto set of standards for data entry. I suppose this is
partly why UX is such a big topic these days. Remember all user interfaces
are designed, whether by the programmer as he goes along or by a designer.
Of course much design is bad. We work with designers and ux people to
produce wireframes, colour pallets, font rules, workflows etc, which can all
form part of the specification for the programmers.
I would recommend you look seriously at design and don't be afraid of using
artistic designers and user experience professionals, I know in the MV world
we have all done entry screens for many years, it does not mean we have been
doing them right !
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Susan Joslyn
Sent: 12 July 2010 13:33
To: [email protected]
Subject: [U2] UI standards
Good morning.
In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
standards?
When I google around I find an immense amount of information. Accessibility
standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs so
your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published standards
regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands of
search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or in
some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological studies
about what colors to use, for example.
If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another - how
much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that this
is, after all, a new interface?
Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always. But
what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and now
those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users really
want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from anyone?
Susan
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 07:39:31 -0600
From: Jeff Schasny <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
If you are writing MS Windows applications this should be on your
bookshelf. A bit dated since it was originally written for Win2K but the
design strategies are the same. 500+ pages of how to make a Microsoftian
interface
Shortened Amazon Link:
*http://tinyurl.com/34xa395*
Symeon Breen wrote:
> You are right there are accessibility standard esp for internet resources,
> but no real de facto set of standards for data entry. I suppose this is
> partly why UX is such a big topic these days. Remember all user interfaces
> are designed, whether by the programmer as he goes along or by a designer.
> Of course much design is bad. We work with designers and ux people to
> produce wireframes, colour pallets, font rules, workflows etc, which can all
> form part of the specification for the programmers.
>
> I would recommend you look seriously at design and don't be afraid of using
> artistic designers and user experience professionals, I know in the MV world
> we have all done entry screens for many years, it does not mean we have been
> doing them right !
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Susan Joslyn
> Sent: 12 July 2010 13:33
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [U2] UI standards
>
> Good morning.
>
>
>
> In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
> standards?
>
>
>
> When I google around I find an immense amount of information. Accessibility
> standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
> published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs so
> your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published standards
> regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands of
> search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or in
> some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological studies
> about what colors to use, for example.
>
>
>
> If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another - how
> much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
> compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that this
> is, after all, a new interface?
>
>
>
> Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always. But
> what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and now
> those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users really
> want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
>
>
>
> Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from anyone?
>
>
>
> Susan
>
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA
jschasny at gmail dot com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:44:13 -0500
From: Dawn Wolthuis <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I have done a lot of reading in this area too, finding some of the best
information by googling for HCI (human computer interface) and UX (user
experience) sites and blogs.
In addition to reading about UI theory, it makes sense to zero in on the
particular run-time environment, such as a browser and both read up on best
practices and check out what others are doing before doing your own thing
any way, perhaps. After all, the good thing about standards is that everyone
can have their own ;-)
If you haven not read "Don't Make Me Think" then I highly recommend doing
so. It illustrates by it's easy reader interface what it discusses. I've
read it twice.
We started with an existing vendor framework for MV AJAX, which comes
pre-packaged with browser UI components. So, we have been evolving the UI by
reaping the low-hanging fruit, then seeing what standards we want to add or
change. That means that we have some things I would not have put in there
from the start (such as some validation alerts, instead of perhaps happier
approaches), that we have simply used out of the box and not yet tailored
for our needs.
I tend toward Keep it Simple, but the "simple" I want is that it be simple
for the user and also, frankly, for maintainability over time. It is rarely
simplest for us to do what is simplest for the user. It definitely takes
work to make the user interface simple.
For each decision there is now a ton of information, as you have found.
While tackling some of it up front, many decisions arise during specific
design tasks later in the development. It is counter-productive to do all
such research and decision-making up front (the BDUF approach).
EXAMPLE
We started with field labels above the data entry field (to the left is the
other common option, with inside the field being another new fangled
approach), using short upper-cased words. I had researched enough to select
the positioning of our labels when starting out, not the wording. When I got
to the point of looking at how to write the labels, such as "Last Name" or
"Last name" or "What is your last name?" or "Your last name" [not to mention
choosing last name over family name or surname, another issue], I read that
there was an ISO standard of "sentence casing" for field labels. Who knew?
For what it's worth, we decided on sentence casing our labels, so in our
alpha delivery of our software, the label is written as "Last name" instead
of Last Name.
--dawn
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Susan Joslyn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good morning.
>
>
>
> In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
> standards?
>
>
>
> When I google around I find an immense amount of information.
> Accessibility
> standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
> published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs so
> your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published standards
> regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands of
> search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or in
> some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological studies
> about what colors to use, for example.
>
>
>
> If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another - how
> much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
> compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that this
> is, after all, a new interface?
>
>
>
> Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always.
> But
> what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and
> now
> those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users really
> want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
>
>
>
> Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from anyone?
>
>
>
> Susan
>
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>
--
Dawn M. Wolthuis
Take and give some delight today
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:49:28 -0400
From: Bill Brutzman <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<4741aa93a2522549a72c9b6cc36c8e610192d76...@arnold.hkmetalcraft.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We here have settled on Adobe's Flash Builder. On top of web and desktop, a
new game changer is being able to easily write apps for mobile devices.
--Bill
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:00:19 -0500
From: Dawn Wolthuis <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sorry for not proof-reading before sending. The possessive ' in "its" alone
is torturous. smiles. --dawn
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Dawn Wolthuis <[email protected]>wrote:
> I have done a lot of reading in this area too, finding some of the best
> information by googling for HCI (human computer interface) and UX (user
> experience) sites and blogs.
>
> In addition to reading about UI theory, it makes sense to zero in on the
> particular run-time environment, such as a browser and both read up on best
> practices and check out what others are doing before doing your own thing
> any way, perhaps. After all, the good thing about standards is that everyone
> can have their own ;-)
>
> If you haven not read "Don't Make Me Think" then I highly recommend doing
> so. It illustrates by it's easy reader interface what it discusses. I've
> read it twice.
>
> We started with an existing vendor framework for MV AJAX, which comes
> pre-packaged with browser UI components. So, we have been evolving the UI by
> reaping the low-hanging fruit, then seeing what standards we want to add or
> change. That means that we have some things I would not have put in there
> from the start (such as some validation alerts, instead of perhaps happier
> approaches), that we have simply used out of the box and not yet tailored
> for our needs.
>
> I tend toward Keep it Simple, but the "simple" I want is that it be simple
> for the user and also, frankly, for maintainability over time. It is rarely
> simplest for us to do what is simplest for the user. It definitely takes
> work to make the user interface simple.
>
> For each decision there is now a ton of information, as you have found.
> While tackling some of it up front, many decisions arise during specific
> design tasks later in the development. It is counter-productive to do all
> such research and decision-making up front (the BDUF approach).
>
> EXAMPLE
> We started with field labels above the data entry field (to the left is the
> other common option, with inside the field being another new fangled
> approach), using short upper-cased words. I had researched enough to select
> the positioning of our labels when starting out, not the wording. When I got
> to the point of looking at how to write the labels, such as "Last Name" or
> "Last name" or "What is your last name?" or "Your last name" [not to mention
> choosing last name over family name or surname, another issue], I read that
> there was an ISO standard of "sentence casing" for field labels. Who knew?
> For what it's worth, we decided on sentence casing our labels, so in our
> alpha delivery of our software, the label is written as "Last name" instead
> of Last Name.
>
> --dawn
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Susan Joslyn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Good morning.
>>
>>
>>
>> In developing a new user interface - how have you folks established
>> standards?
>>
>>
>>
>> When I google around I find an immense amount of information.
>> Accessibility
>> standards. Industry standards. And many games and applications have
>> published their standards - how to make your software look like theirs so
>> your users are already familiar. I don't see as many published standards
>> regarding data entry screens. (But I am still plowing through thousands
>> of
>> search results!) Still many of these standards are personal choice. Or in
>> some cases far to the opposite extreme - you can find psychological
>> studies
>> about what colors to use, for example.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you set standards on a previous interface and now move to another - how
>> much do you want to stick to your standards for consistency and
>> compatibility and how much do you want to break out and show-off that this
>> is, after all, a new interface?
>>
>>
>>
>> Obviously there are technical limitations - with the new stuff, always.
>> But
>> what about design decisions you made based on previous limitations - and
>> now
>> those limitations are lifted!? How crazy do you go? What do users really
>> want? (Now there is something to ponder!)
>>
>>
>>
>> Any thoughts, ideas, references and discussion on this topic from anyone?
>>
>>
>>
>> Susan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> U2-Users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dawn M. Wolthuis
>
> Take and give some delight today
>
--
Dawn M. Wolthuis
Take and give some delight today
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:38:04 -0400
From: Rex Gozar <[email protected]>
To: U2 Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [U2] UI standards
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
As far as UI standards for data entry applications are concerned, I
recommend Microsoft's User Experience Guidelines as a starting point.
Google "msdn windows 7 user experience guidelines", navigate to the
MSDN page, find the PDF link and download the document.
Most business people use Microsoft products daily. If your
application follows the same basic layouts and uses the same keyboard
shortcuts, your users will quickly learn your application; as a bonus,
your application will teach them how to use their MS products.
However, if your application works contrary to MS products, or
requires them to memorize a different command set, then they'll
despise you and your product.
Have your developers read the book "GUI Bloopers" to avoid stupid GUI layouts.
Also "User Interface Design for Programmers" is helpful.
<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/fog0000000249.html> When is it
okay to break out and show off a new interface? When it matches the
user's imaginary model, not the developers!
Finally, desktop and web applications are starting to blur into one
another, so it's okay to borrow practices and standards from one and
implement them in the other.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
End of U2-Users Digest, Vol 15, Issue 9
***************************************
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
