[chandler-users] The troublesome 'Remove' word: alternatives?

Graham Perrin G.J.Perrin at bton.ac.uk
Thu Jan 15 00:32:12 PST 2009


Subject: expected dialogues, unexpected pop-up dialogues, getting things done
with and without dialogues


Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> 
> … Point me to the user study that says that _all_ pop-ups hurt usability
> or are counter to expert usage… 
> 

Without arguing either way, I offer an example from within OpenOffice.org
Project Renaissance,† within the User Experience (UX) Project area.††
<http://ux.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=discuss&msgNo=2688>†††
describes a basic goal of one contributor's design:

> to 100% eliminate any workflow processes that require the
> user to leave his workspace. He should never be prompted
> with a pop-up when a more than appropriate sidebar can
> display the necessary options - as he needs them - rather
> than have to stop working with the document long enough to
> make the changes in a pop up and then hit "ok" only to
> have to go BACK into the pop up again because the changes
> were not satisfactory to him.

-- <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:JaronBaron>

Within the current research phase
<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance:The_Roadmap> of
Renaissance, the User Feedback Program is beginning. Whilst I don't expect
the results of such research to conclude/recommend that pop-ups are
Universally Bad Things, it will be interesting to follow progress. Assuming
I'm still involved there at relevant times in the future, I might offer some
pointers from chandler-users to OpenOffice.org UX whenever something
particularly interesting occurs.

(One OOo thing of probable future interest to Chandler developers was
released two days ago, I'll post that to a separate topic.)

(Relax: I shan't flood Chandler with information from OOo! AFAIR this is my
first mention of the OOo side.)



> … I hate superfluous pop-ups also. But discounting the very notion of them
> as
> always hurting expert usage seems a bit extreme…
> 

I sometimes dislike the *unexpected* appearance of a dialogue. 

I do often find that a considerately designed, keyboard accessible
*expected* dialogue allows me to get a thing done:

a)	more rapidly, 

b)	with greater confidence and 

c)	with greater focus

— than a single-workspace UI that or requires excessive mouse movement, or
is unpredictable, or less than 100% clear, or has squeezed an excess into
any area. YMMV.

(I don't doubt that other software titles present dialogues that don't fit
my a-b-c. These are probably the software titles that I try, then rapidly
discard or set aside. Amongst the first prize winners at
<http://mashable.com/openwebawards/the-winners/> is something that I love,
conceptually, but its lack of keyboard-friendliness makes it too slow to be
viable for me.)

---

Back to Chandler: 

Oh. I can't remember what I was going to say now! Rather than muddle, I'll
post this message before I forget, then pick up the thread when I'm sane.

---
†   <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance>
††  <http://ux.openoffice.org/>
††† Following the December 2008 creation of a dedicated list, discussion
relating to Renaissance was stered from discuss at ux… to ui at ux…;
<http://n2.nabble.com/-f1803106.html> covers the period from 5th January
2009; <http://ux.openoffice.org/servlets/ProjectMailingListList> for the
more comprehensive (but less easily searchable) archives of the superset of
UX lists.
-- 
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/The-troublesome-%27Remove%27-word%3A-alternatives--tp2153098p2161388.html
Sent from the Chandler users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



More information about the chandler-users mailing list