[Design] [Proposal] What is Chandler supposed to do anyway?
mimi at osafoundation.org
Mon Dec 10 13:33:38 PST 2007
Just to clarify: There is no design argument against separating
application areas and views. It's more a matter of implementing the
UI elements needed to do this in a way that doesn't visually
overwhelm the interface. (Something we're already struggling with.)
The decision to combine app areas + filter functionality boiled down
to prioritization. (In the Chandler Hub UI, we have a different take
on this problem. We *only* have views, no application areas.) We
should revisit this issue in the context of our post 1.0 plans.
> On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Heikki Toivonen wrote:
>> D John Anderson wrote:
>>> The only downside that I've heard mentioned to it is that it
>>> takes more
>>> screen real estate to implement two separate controls instead of
>>> one and
>>> sometimes requires an extra step to get where you want to go. Our
>>> tool bar buttons don't extend easily to many new filters or display
>>> types, so you'd probably have to go with something open ended like a
>>> drop down list.
>> This resonates with me as well, I've been somewhat uncomfortable with
>> how things are but haven't really thought much beyond that.
>> view and filter makes sense to me.
>> Also, I like the idea of putting a separate toolbar for the table
>> ("table toolbar"). The way I see it, the current All, Mail, Tasks,
>> Calendar buttons could become two: Table and Calendar. And the Table
>> Toolbar would have Task, Event, Mail and Note filters that you could
>> select singly or in any combination. Heck, if you wanted to go
>> fancy you
>> could create and apply custom filters.
>> Heikki Toivonen
More information about the Design