> and into 16-bit", and that's the kind of thing simply /designed/ to go
> straight up my luddite nose.
Luddite implies a throwback, fighting progress, etc. Somehow, I don't
quite see the applicability of the term here... Maybe I too, am missing
something...
> * * * * * * * *
> * * * * ** * * * * *
> * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * * ***** * * * * ** ** * ***** *
> ***** * * * * * * * * *
> * * * * * * * * * *
> * * ***** * * * * * *
> you may have heard of them..
When we did the initial user testing of the first browser, this
concept was mysterious to users. I think in a way, it still is.
We solved this by using the tab key to move the cursor to the next
thing that was "doable", (and patented the concept,) so that the user
would not be confused. Only potential actions could be found by hitting
the tab key, freeing the user from having to comprehend what each thing on
the screen was. We called it TabTalk because you talked to the computer
with your (pre-mouse) tab key. Most people said it was a stupid name till
they tried the product. Then they said there was no other name for it.
We also found that for people to grasp the linkage concept, we had to
have the screen split and open up at the point of the link, as if the old
text was being withdrawn up and down away from the entry point. Then soon
got the idea that a link was a doorway. When going back, we made the
screen pieces close down towards the point from which they had entered.
This further enforced the idea that they were moving in and out in a
larger structure of interconnected documents.
I found the multiple ways of linking in the later Apple product to be
too potentially confusing, and their artists too obsessed with glorifying
the linkage process over the informational context itself. (I forget the
name of that product...)
> online presentation.. well, okay, i *do*.. but i'm willing to accept the
> idea that some sites can benefit from a stronger emphasis on
> ornamentation. heck, even i'll get a wild hair sometimes, and set the
> background color of a page to white.
Simplicity can be elegant. But complexity soon confuses people. My
father, and engineer with a number of patents in his name, found the
original Netscape browser far more confusing than our earlier TabTalk
product. He keeps asking where to click. In contrast during one of our
demos, a five and a half year old kid grasped the concept in a matter of
minutes and had a lot of fun with our TabTalk product despite the fact he
was still learning to read.
> that being the case, i recognize the use of image links as a convenient
> way to organize navigational elements on a page.. and that's a big
> concession IMHO, because it implies several fundamental things about the
> interface. if images are to be used as links, they need to support the
> same feedback operations as text links.
Yes! Cues as to where one can click! We should not HAVE to mouse
grope the entire page to find a link!!!
> the thing that chips little flakes off my bum is the fact that none of
> the standard rollovers do that. text links.. those plain old, boring,
> "so simple they have to be replaced" page features.. support a
> surprisingly intricate set of behaviors, if you take a serious look at
> them.
> stop and think about the highlighing on a text link for a minute.. it
> changes color to let you know that you have, in fact, clicked in the
> right spot to activate the link. it's the visual equivalent of the
> 'click' of the mouse button or the little 'pop' you feel when pressing a
> key on a decent keyboard.
Feedback!!!
> now take a look at the average linked image with a javascript rollover..
> it doesn't wait for the user to click, it rolls over as soon as the
> mouse is within the active frame of the image. the meaning of the
> highlight has been redefined from "you have triggered an action" to "the
> cursor is over this image".
> one word: duh.
That is what my father complains about. My mother, and artist, has
not quite grasped the "big picture" yet. (Then again, she is in her 80's,
and never was technologically savvy.)
> for those of you who do choose to use rollovers to highlight an image,
> please stick to the same conventions as are used for text links. have
> the rollover happen when the user presses down on the mouse button, and
> the actual page transition happen when the user *releases* the button.
> if you do the transition when the button goes down, you short-circuit
> the popup menus which allow users to do things like bookmark the link or
> open a new browser window.
We can argue about this, but it would be more reasonable.
One of the hardest things for a mind to do, is to change contexts.
Every time you have to address the mechanics of going somewhere, or
finding something on the screen, you are forced to do a context switch
from the content of the screen to the mechanics of movement _AND_ the
mental work of navigation. OF the two, Navigation is harder, because it
requires you to CONSTRUCT a structure within your head, use it to predict
where you are likely to be IF you do A, B, or C, and then DECIDE which
action seems more likely to take you where to go.
> of course, one of the most useful features of text links, which
> rollovers don't even touch, is that they display the user's click
> history. it's not the kind of thing you pay attention to, normally,
YES!!!
And the best way of doing this would be a hierarchical stack -- an
indented outline of where you went.
mainscreen.html
firstlevel.html
secondlevel.a.html
alternate.html
alter-alternate.html
inneraltalt.html
deeper.inner.html
eurika.html
alt3.html
That too, is described in our old product. http://www.mall-net.com/tt/
> but the ability to glance at a page and see which links have been
> followed is something that users find tremendously reassuring. dimmed
> links are the digital equivalent of chalk marks on the cave walls, which
> keep you from getting lost. they allow you to spot dead ends without
> having to follow them again, and they provide a back-trail to help you
> remember where you've been.
Fortunately, you do have the back key as your chalk marks, BUT it does
not address making the HIERARCHY of YOUR traversal visible or
comprehensible.
> another thing which thoroughly ticks me off is the use of selections as
> popup menus for navigation. the desirability of this concept just
> doesn't fit in my head.. and i *know* the traditional justification for
Context shift: pop-up
What do the words/names mean?
Which one do I chose?
How do I make sure it works?
Context shift:
now what?
Context shift:
new page is coming
> not enough excuse-me-*what*? this is the kerflippin' WEB! the amount
> of available screen space is a multiple of screen pitch, modem speed,
> and mean clicks before failure of the mouse button.
What is on this new page? Why is it so slow?
It does not say anything yet...
I'll just go back.
> to save the user from having to click on something which will show them
> a list of available options, you make them click on something which will
> show them a list of available options.
> do ya see where i'm coming from?
Well, presumably, the fact that the context is a subset of the screen
rather than the whole screen, does minimize the context shift by about ten
to twenty percent less than a total screen change.
The PROPER way to link contexts, is to link contexts -- in the text
or diagrams being displayed, rather than pull-downs, pop-ups, or other
confusing events.
"The Ominiverter Power supply is composed of a universal
_Flagnimatic_Inverter_ coupled with a _Cyclonic_Particulate_ incinerator
that consumes any potential sources of energy via _E-MC_Squared_ type
conversions."
Obvious, no? Don't understand? Click on it! No context shifts
required except that of getting the more detailed context of the term!
> the voice of public opinion as overwhelmingly declared that users don't
> give a wet slap about flash in most cases, and the developer community
> is starting to do a good job of carrying that message to its clients.
Slowly... We have gone from Ego-Mania of the first round, to the
gageteria, and now, having found we can draw crap on the bottle of void
ourselves, some of us are beginning to remember that the best novels, the
most important concepts, etc. are to be found in these wood pulp things
that often have a LOT of text, and only on rare occasions, have DIAGRAMS
and other illustrations that ASSIST comprehension of the actual text.
The Grand Potential of the web, is the presentation of a HIERARCHY of
conceptual understanding. That means, if you don't instantly understand
what a _Flagnimatic_Inverter_ or a _Cyclonic_Particulate_ is, you can
descend to the appropriate explanation so that you CAN understand what the
overview MEANS.
And that, is what the knowledge structures I have been creating for
industry are all about. In one case, I generated a seven megabyte site
linking all the esoteric engineering terms in a bunch of documents to
other uses thereof and to the definitions thereof. It lasted about
fifteen minutes before it was worthless. Why? Because in fifteen
minutes, we realized the contract would bankrupt us! In contrast, the
competitors had spent several man months pouring through the documentation
by hand, and STILL had not grasped the guts -- the organization that put
the contract out for bid, DID NOT have a clear grasp of WHAT had to be
done, NO ONE knew within an estimatable limit how much it would cost to do
it, much less the people who designed the specifications. How could we
do a fixed bid? We couldn't. And a week and a half later, our
competitions came to a similar conclusion.
Hierarchical Descent to detailed definitions and examples of usage
accomplished several MAN MONTHS of work in FIFTEEN MINUTES!
That is power LEVELING the comprehension ability so the Common
intellectually capable person has the same ability as the jargon rich
technician in the field. (And then we may see just how much cognitive
ability the technician, having dug himself beyond the reach of common
sense, lacks!)
> rendering and blinking text were bleeding edge technologies, and anyone
> who put 150K of graphics in a page was just *way* too impressed with
> their mastery of Photoshop 2.5.
(Mumble... I've seen 1 megabyte pages... KILL!!!)
> yes, the bandwidth has improved, and the standard browsers support
> enough bloatware that you can pare away 90% of the cruft and still have
> a perfectly adequate display system. there's also a whole lot more
> built into the basic fabric of HTML itself, much of which represents an
> uneasy detente among the unfriendly variants of bloatware. the core
> concept of hypertext hasn't changed much at all, though. the back to
> basics movement is great, but it's also good to refresh one's memory of
> just how *basic* basic can be.
>
People are after CONTENT, not glitz. Graphics predates text, not
just from the days of comic books, but from the Neolithic. Yet Shakespeare
didn't write comic books. He wrote text which could be set into motion in
a theater or IN YOUR MIND! Content!
Today, there is so much content-free language and concept-free prose,
that it is getting harder and harder to find meaningful content in the
twenty thousand pages one finds on even the less popular topics.
(Yes, google... but when most "reviewers" (those who link) are similarly
devoid of sensibilities, selecting meaningful from content free babble is
still a chore.)
Luddites of the world, Unite! Indeed.
Elegance is the essence of simplicity.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------- IMAGINEERING --------------------------
----------------- Every mouse click, a Vote -------------------
---------- Do they vote For, or Against your pages? -----------
----- What people want: http://www.mall-net.com/se_report/ ----
---------------------------------------------------------------
--- Have you analyzed your viewer's footprints in the logs? ---
--- Webmaster's Resources: http://www.mall-net.com/webcons/ ---
--- Web Imagineering -- Architecture to Programming CGI-BIN ---
---------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The NEW Web Consultants Association FORUMS and CHAT:
Register Today at: http://just4u.com/forums/
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
Give the Gift of Life This Year...
Just4U Stop Smoking Support forum - helping smokers for
over three years-tell a friend: http://just4u.com/forums/
To get 500 Banner Ads for FREE
go to http://www.linkbuddies.com/start.go?id=111261
---------------------------------------------------------------------
