On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Rodney Dawes
<[email protected]> wrote:
But users may not consider that to be the main focus. If as a user, I
do
not want to use scopes, and am looking for apps, I shouldn't have the
app hidden from me, because I'm choosing to only view the apps in the
store. The store interface isn't about what developers want, it's
about
what users want.
Response the first:
We are told, as developers, to "create unique and valuable user
experiences" [1]. Part of creating a user experience is to design and
guide the user on a particular path through the application. Perhaps
that starts with a scope and flows seamlessly into an app, to display
richer results. Perhaps is starts in an app and flows into a scope to
allow querying of remote resources. Perhaps it does something more
complicated. To do this, developers need to be able to specify the
(default) entry point to their application. Forcing them to accept
entry from any point is antithetical to providing a designed experience.
Response the second:
Why should users need to know about the technological details behind an
application? If a "scopey" application uses a simple QML app to
provide a feature not available in the scope, the user doesn't need to
know. Nor should they care if an "appy" application turns operation
over to a scope for small feature. The fact that different processes
are responsible for putting pixels on the screen should not stop the
user from thinking of the first as a scope and the second as an app.
In short, if a developer decides that their app+scope is a scope, we
should believe them. In fact, I would argue that there should be a way
for the developer to keep the app icon from showing up in the app grid,
so that the only entry point is through the scope.
As a for-instance: My Gmail scope offers a pretty awful reply
functionality [2], limited by the capabilities of scopes. I'm toying
around with a little QML app that would allow more full-featured
replies. But I wouldn't want this combined package to be listed as an
app, since the QML part is designed only to be entered from the scope.
Robert
[1] http://design.ubuntu.com/apps/getting-started/design-vision
[2] Er, that's awful functionality for replies, not functionality for
awful replies. The latter is coming in v2.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
