A wiki is a great idea. Then we could tackle many disparate problems, and start grouping similar ideas together into a coherent interface.
I don't feel wave.google.com had a generic interface. It was strongly influenced by Gmail/Facebook, and threaded comments like Reddit. Profile pics, for instance, are used in at least four contexts: Contact list, Wave Inbox, at the top of a wave (participants list), and within a wave. So you can easily be looking at a screen in Gwave where you see the same pic 4 times. To me, that screams Facebook. One thing I would like to see is more designer/developer friendly tools for creating and modifying the interface. Torben's Wala-compiler is headed in the right direction. Java/GWT is an incredibly high barrier to entry for UI designers. I'm interested in creating HTML/CSS/JS mockups of design ideas. Still working on Tensor, which is a study in tree structures and contextual blips (eg, an issue tracker wavelet where blips are tasks). Ideally, WIAB should eventually ship with multiple skins/interfaces. These should serve as starting points of different interface paradigms for people looking to customize WIAB. Also, slightly too specific, how feasible would a Wiki-like two column revision history be to build? GWave's Playback was cool, but not very practical for reviewing groups of changes. On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Michael MacFadden < [email protected]> wrote: > Again I agree completely. Maybe I should set up a wiki page where > people can most mock ups and ideas for us to discuss. As I said I > think the more diverse ideas we can look at, the better off we will > be. > > Michael > > On Nov 27, 2:23 pm, x00 <[email protected]> wrote: > > Figure out aims (already started), project initial user base, get UI > > people on board, don't be limited by gwt, look into methods of hooking > > up interfaces, schematics, schematics, mockups, etc. > > > > *more detail* > > > > Wave is kind of user centric at the moment. I know it sounds > > contradictory making a user interface other than user centric. But it > > isn't about making it less user friendly, on the contrary, more bout > > striking the balance between task and the users (which obviously are > > an important part of getting the task done). I created a schematic for > > an interface that was more task centric, and it was actually like a > > walk-through experience (wave agnostic). It is too specific for WAIB, > > but the general idea that social media for the sake of social media, > > whilst good for reaping personal information, is ultimately not > > uniquely useful to the users other than status reasons, whereas things > > like wave are about getting things done and communicating ideas > > collaboratively. Obviously there are other synonyms for "task" but you > > get the idea. I think architecture that reflects the aim to > > collaborate on something makes sense. > > > > I know I said this before, but I'll say it again. “Conversation” is > > just a default communication. It is one type of collaborative > > communication amongst many possibilities. Granted it will be a popular > > one that would be used along side app doc and other things. However > > it would be good in the long term to build all models and their > > interfaces with api for that. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Wave Protocol" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<wave-protocol%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
