Hi Jacques, I agree too. Showing all contact mech details in a hover would enhance user experience. But is all about real estate. If room is available I would like to see some contact mech details on the same line as the name of the contact (eg. phone number and/or email address).
Regards, Pierre 2009/10/26 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> > For instance I found the "I" (Information) icon a good idea in SugarCRM. > It only shows contact's contact mechs details on an hover over the icon, > but it's convenient. > It's all about improving users experience, they really like it (don't you ? > ;o) > > Jacques > > From: "Pierre Smits" <[email protected]> > > Showing default search results is one thing. Enhancing (combining) search > posibilities is another. It is al about clicks..... > > Why not have search screens combined (by default) so that users experience > an enhanced ease of use. E.g. in party (account, employee, etc) combine the > search on party name (first name and/or last name) with details from > contact > mechs (e.g. country or postal code) beside showing advanced search > possibilities. > > And as far as SugarCRM goes: they have found a nack to deliver what > customers want, which among others is an ease of use. So, why not steal > with > pride and improve. > > Regards, > > Pierre > > PS I did not actually intend to promote theft. > > E.g in one screen > 2009/10/26 Scott Gray <[email protected]> > > BTW I think the absolute best thing we could do to improve search >> usability >> is to implement saved searches without a doubt. >> >> Regards >> Scott >> >> >> On 26/10/2009, at 10:37 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >> >> I was just trying to point out that it's usefulness decreases >> >>> exponentially as the number of pages in the result set increases (i.e. >>> the >>> likelihood that you will find what you are looking for on the first >>> page). >>> IMO it only really makes sense when the list is ordered by the newest >>> record first such as orders, tasks, emails, etc. >>> >>> I personally don't really care either way, I just feel that the effort >>> required to make it configurable outweighs the benefits. If the list >>> should >>> show results then just show them and if it shouldn't then don't, why >>> bother >>> with all the extra work of making it configurable just because the >>> developers disagree on which is the best approach. >>> >>> BTW, SugarCRM is one of many popular CRM suites out there and I don't >>> think that just because they do something a certain way makes that >>> approach >>> the best one :-) >>> >>> Regards >>> Scott >>> >>> HotWax Media >>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>> >>> On 26/10/2009, at 9:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> >>> Scott, >>> >>>> >>>> I did not find enough time for that. This idea cames to me after a short >>>> test of SugarCRM last version. >>>> I think we could show results by default in SFA at least. There should >>>> not be too much results, and with the new length parameter Bruno is >>>> working >>>> on, this should improve user experience. >>>> This because it seems that some decision-makers began to look at OFBiz >>>> from the CRM/SFA perspective. >>>> We should take care of their expericen, most of the time they decide of >>>> our future... >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> Could you provide an example search form where this might be useful? >>>>>> Perhaps talking about specific forms might be more helpful. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> I will try tomorrow to explain why, I must admit I have not yet >>>>> considered the how >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> I have no problem with OFBiz being set one way or the other but making >>>>> >>>>>> it configurable seems like a lot for little return. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 10:37 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Not only people evaluating OFBiz, but also people dealing with small >>>>>> >>>>>>> numbers. Maybe this should not be applied to all searches, though. >>>>>>> Remember, OFBiz was set this way not so long ago. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -1, that sounds like a lot of work and additional complexity and >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> what? So that people evaluating OFBiz don't have to click on a >>>>>>>> search >>>>>>>> button in order to do a search? I'm sorry but it really makes no >>>>>>>> sense >>>>>>>> to me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> HotWax Media >>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 9:51 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also in the case of searching by default, the search fields should >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> be visible (it's no obvious as it's only a string in the screenlet >>>>>>>>> title) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OOTB, we decided to not do searches by default when a page >>>>>>>>>> containing one is opened (I was for this decision) >>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should not parametrize this in the DB and let it >>>>>>>>>> available in the "My Portal" Préférences ? >>>>>>>>>> Then we could set it to yes by default and avoid people >>>>>>>>>> evaluating >>>>>>>>>> OFBiz to clic on search button each time they open a such page. >>>>>>>>>> We could also have an URL going to the preferences in each search >>>>>>>>>> to allow a quick change if needed >>>>>>>>>> This is not related to lookup dialog boxes but only searches in >>>>>>>>>> plain pages. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What do you think ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
