[Design] Re: [Cosmo] Styleguide Notes + Follow-up

[Priscilla Chung]

My response inline:

On Apr 27, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Mimi Yin wrote:

> Thx for pulling this together Priss. I agree with all the items in  
> your 3 buckets. I would add:
>
> + Collection pulldown and Collection details button into the 2nd  
> bucket.
> + Login area links into the 2nd bucket
I respectfully disagree and would put this in the third bucket. Users  
looking for the collection drop down list and log in are already sold  
on cosmo and would already have an account. So maybe we're talking  
about different users for these buckets, those who already have an  
account and those who are coming to the hub for the first time. I'm  
focused on the new users—as you phrased it, 'CC's who don't know  
anything about Chandler.'

>
> Additionally, I wonder if there is a class of items that should pop  
> a little bit more, even though they're technically things that  
> people won't need unless they're looking for them...the reasoning  
> being that these are things that users will be unfamiliar with,  
> especially CC's who don't know anything about Chandler. This would  
> include stuff like:
>
> + Mark-up bar buttons: Triage status and Stamping
> + Triage status in the Table
> + Week versus Day view selectors in the Calendar view (the way we  
> do it is unconventional)
Well yes, the web app does not have a week vs. day view. Why should  
this be 'unconventional' on the desktop? Perhaps it would be better  
to be 'conventional' on the web app, because causal collaborators  
will not understand  'unconventional' approaches unless they see  
immediate, significant benefits. (This fell into no. three for me  
when I was using the desktop btw. and that was only because Jared had  
told me to click on the day of the week to see day view. Clearly he  
uses day view—I do not.)

> + Remove and Save buttons (again because we have a multi-pane  
> layout, users may assume that you don't need to explicitly save  
> changes).
>
> So I guess what I'm saying is that I'm suggesting we have 2 tiers  
> in the 2nd bucket.
>
> 1 Stuff users need to see immediately, whether or not they're looking
>
> 2A Stuff users need to trip over when trying to complete a task,  
> because they may not know what it is exactly they should be looking  
> for.
> 2B Stuff users need to be find easily when looking for them.
Both of these items are for users who need to find it when completing  
a task. If they are tripping over it, then we've not done our jobs  
and it fell into the third category.
>
> 3  Stuff users can find on their own time
This is all great for us, but honestly, I'm not convinced users will  
understand the subtleties you're trying to get across in no. two.  
Users either see a feature because it truly stands out against the  
'grey' of the application or users will ignore it and only 'see' the  
feature in context of the activity. Adding these extra levels just  
adds more 'noise'. The third item is the 'Oh how neat, I never knew  
it did that!', which are the stuff users will discover on their own  
after using it after a while, or stuff we emphasize (and de- 
emphasize) in direct response to the user's action.


>
> ===
>
> It may also be helpful to have a shared understanding of the  
> various visual techniques available to us when it comes to  
> implementing or applying the priorities we have set to the UI:
>
> 1. Location
> + Above the fold, below the fold
> + Top left corner
Top right corner, center? Highlighted very top of the application  
(alert bar) which will slightly overlap the app?
> + Dead center
>
> 2. Size
>
> 3. Saturation (ie. Grey text versus Black text)
>
> 4. Color and Brightness (ie. Bright green v. Dull grey)
>
> 5. Layering (ie. Overlay on top of UI, like a dialog)
>
> 6. Weight (ie. Line weight, Beveling, Drop shadows)
>
> Does that sound reasonable?
Yes the last part sounds fine to me. Thx. -Priscilla

>
> On Apr 27, 2007, at 6:18 PM, Priscilla Chung wrote:
>
>> Here is my list: http://wiki.osafoundation.org/Journal/ 
>> OrderOfImportanceWebUI
>> -Priscilla

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/attachments/20070430/1258a15f/attachment.html