[Design] [Cosmo] Accessibility for home collection browser
mimi at osafoundation.org
Mon Dec 4 12:48:22 PST 2006
Hi Jared, I'm not entirely sure I'm following your line of reasoning,
so bear with me as I try to figure out the fallout of what you're
saying in design terms:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Jared Rhine wrote:
> Sheila Mooney wrote:
>> + We need to design the right UI optimized for our primary target
>> user -
>> casual collaborator.
> I'm not sure I understand the use case for a casual collaborator
> the file browser.
> Mimi defined CC thus:
> "We've defined Casual Collaborator as someone who comes to Cosmo UI
> a Chandler user sends them a ticket to share a group Dashboard/
> Why will someone with this background want/need to see a filesystem
> People adding/deleting collections seem no longer "casual" or even
> driven by
> the sharer; they are working independently.
Yes. And furthermore, it's unclear that people using the filesystem
view are working within the PIM domain. My understanding was that it
was highly unlikely homedir browser users would be using the homedir
view for PIM use cases.
> Also, it was said "there will be minimal overlap between home dir
> users and
> Casual Collaborators".
> This seems to further imply CC are using the file-browsing
> interface less
> than "home dir" users.
> I'm concerned that optimizing for the casual collaborator may lower
> functionality available to those really using the file browser, a
> target group as I read the discussion.
I think this is where I'm getting lost. When you say 'optimizing for
the casual collaborator" do you mean, making the homedir browser
accessible to the CC? just in case the CC might also want to use the
I would agree with that.
> Therefore it seems to me that the design should be "optimized" for the
> target group using the planned UI, ie not the casual collaborator.
What do you mean by the planned UI? The end-user UI is optimized for
the CC. The homedir browser and access to the homedir should not be
optimized for the CC, but instead, should be optimized for the file-
sharing user, a user who is not collaborating with a Chandler user on
PIM scenarios via the Hosted Service.
> I agree that the file browser should be available to all users and not
> confuse the casual collaborator, but user-centered design would
> seem to
> suggest optimizing for the common case.
What do you mean by common case?
I think I see a clear separation in designs or UIs. 1 for admins. 1
for file-sharing users and 1 for the end-user CC. While it is true
that the Cosmo/Scooby merge means that all of these things are
integrated into a single project / code-base...I believe as consumer
facing products/services, they should be distinct and separate.
Perhaps that is the source of the general confusion?
In other words, are we trying to cram too much functionality into a
> Reasonable people can of course disagree on the expected common
> case. I've
> tried my best to absorb the thread, as others no doubt have as well.
> -- Jared
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
More information about the Design