[Design] [cosmo] [proposal] Detail View

[Travis Vachon]

+1
On May 7, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Bobby Rullo wrote:

> I think it looks pretty snazzy.
>
> If Matthew thinks it's not too much  extra work than sure, +1
>
> Bobby
>
> On May 7, 2007, at 10:22 AM, Priscilla Chung wrote:
>
>> This coming week Matthew is going to re-implement  the details  
>> view of the web UI in order to support stamping for dashboard. He  
>> informed me that he will have to start from clean slate.  From my  
>> understanding, the amount of time to implement a layout identical  
>> to the desktop and time to implement a proposal are about the same.
>>
>> So we took this opportunity to look at the event details on the  
>> desktop and see if there are ways to address some of the known  
>> issues. How to make it behave more like a web application. Come up  
>> with more visually acceptable solutions to incorporate all the  
>> form elements without losing the 'Save' and 'Remove' button on  
>> smaller screen sizes.
>>
>> ***Note: Please review the questions below before commenting on  
>> the design proposal.***
>>
>> We came up with a proposal which is a slight departure from the  
>> current desktop layout of the detail view:
>> http://wiki.osafoundation.org/Projects/ 
>> CosmoZeroDotSevenSpec#CurrentMockUp
>>
>> *The reasons for coming up with a new proposal for detail view are  
>> the following:*
>> + The current layout which is adapted to the desktop app is not  
>> well suited to web conventions.
>> + This layout better scales to handle small screen sizes and/or  
>> additional types of stamps.
>> + Right now we have only three stamps, but there is no more space  
>> on the horizontal 'mark up bar'. The proposed layout scales for  
>> addition stamps, including other ideas such as annotations for  
>> read-only collections, per a previous discussion on the design  
>> list: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2007-May/ 
>> 007059.html ).
>> + The visual relationship strengthens the visual grouping and  
>> association for the address, task and event stamp and their  
>> associated capabilities.
>> + The Casual Collaborator target user, is someone who does not use  
>> the desktop every day and may need more guidance in understanding  
>> the concept of the the address, task and event stamp.
>> + It's not going to take more time to build than implementing the  
>> layout similar to the desktop.
>> + The current layout which is adapted to the desktop is very tight— 
>> the web app may have problems with different fonts and font size.
>>
>> From the very beginning Mimi and I agreed to keep the two  
>> applications consistent, but only *where it makes sense*. This  
>> proposal is not intending to create a unique web UI for the sake  
>> of it. We felt the web app is a good way to try ideas out, where  
>> the desktop app lacked in experimentation because it would longer  
>> and be prone to more bugs.
>>
>> *The reason not to move forward with a new proposal for the detail  
>> view:*
>> + Discussion on the design list may impact schedule.
>> + If this proposal distracts from 'the purpose of preview',  it  
>> makes sense to postpone this discussion till post preview.
>> + It's not identical to the desktop app and might cause problems  
>> with some users, primarily desktop users who are used to using the  
>> desktop. For preview, the target user for the web UI are Casual  
>> Collaborator and not the 'Consultative desktop users'.
>>
>> It's fine if we decide to move forward and mimic the layout on the  
>> desktop, as long we're aware of the known issues. Trying something  
>> new may fix some issues however it will also create other issues.  
>> If our concern is schedule, doing something new may not  
>> necessarily cause risk—though I lean on Ted/Matthew to confirm this.
>>
>> Usability risk is unknown at this point because we don't have  
>> users testing the proposed layout vs. the desktop layout, but  
>> implementing two different layouts offers us the opportunity to  
>> test and learn from our users. I understand completely if the team  
>> as a whole does not want to take a chance on this because there  
>> are a lot of risk factors already.
>>
>> *Questions:*
>> Forgive my bluntness, but it seems like time is against our side,  
>> so before commenting on the proposal, I'd first like to ask:
>> + Is this proposal distracting everyone from 'purpose of preview'?
>> + If so, then we should consider tabling this discussion till post  
>> preview—where it belongs?
>>
>> -Priscilla
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/attachments/20070507/d91b1db7/attachment.htm