>At 10:15 PM -0700 6/6/2002, Troy Rollins wrote: >>1) we need a scripting cookbook. Preferably printed, and we have no >>problem with the concept of paying for it (like the manuals.) > >Next version. It is being worked on even as I type (well, ten seconds >before I started typing, and probably ten seconds after I finish, anyway). > >>2) in the Rev on-line docs - all links should have color or some >>indication of being "hot". It is EXTREMELY poor design to have hot text >>which is based on invisible hotspots. > >Sorry, but no. Let me explain. > >The hot spots on a web page (to take one example) are generally primary: >that is, they are gateways to information that all readers are presumably >interested in. Given this, the visual measles that afflicts most web pages >is a reasonable price to pay; it makes the page less readable, but it helps >you find the links. > >The clickable hot spots in Revolution's documentation are of two kinds: >Transcript terms and glossary entries. The Transcript terms are primary, >and they're marked with boldface - which compromises readability somewhat, >but 1) makes them easy to find and 2) prevents problems where a Transcript >term is also an English word, and therefore might cause confusion if it >weren't marked in some way. (E.g. references to the "it" variable: >"Therefore, if you need to use the value of it, make sure none of these >commands is executed between the time you set it and the time you read its >value.") Failing to mark a primary hotspot is indeed bad design, because >the assumption is that all users are interested in this further >information, and not marking it is making the user hunt for it. > >Glossary entries, on the other hand, are not primary sources of >information; they're not going to be useful, generally speaking, unless the >term defined is one you don't know. If you don't understand a word, >clicking it to see whether a definition is available is a fairly natural >thing to do, whether the word is marked or not. But clicking the glossary >entry for a term you already know is a waste of time, and not something the >user should be invited or prompted to do. > >Marking the glossary entries also makes the documentation very difficult to >read because it introduces so much visual distraction. I keep the >underlineLinks turned on when I'm editing, so I can see what I'm doing, and >I can tell you it's not a pretty sight and not easy to read for sense. It's >too much harm to both readability and usability for too little gain, in >this case.
Having faced this problem (many glossary terms - relatively small amount of text) with a number of educational software titles we have developed we opted to provide page-specific lists of glossary terms adjacent to the main text. I have to agree with Troy that 'invisible' hyperlinks are way less than ideal. Cheers, Terry... >-- >Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Runtime Revolution Limited - The Solution for Software Development >http://www.runrev.com/ > > >_______________________________________________ >use-revolution mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
