Re: [libreoffice-design] Design ethos

Hi Mirek, all!

Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 00:06 +0200 schrieb Mirek M.:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Christoph Noack <christoph@dogmatux.com>wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, den 12.06.2012, 15:34 +0200 schrieb Björn Balazs:
...
> > > I think we really should ask ourselves: "What is the problem? What do we
> > want
> > > to reach?" instead of generally argueing for or against the suggested
> > (and
> > > obviously proven) approach from Mozilla.
> >
> > Yes, thanks for the reminder ... and thanks for the pre-formulated
> > proposals.
> >
> > > I think there have been two possible goals deriving out of this
> > discussion so
> > > far:
> > >
> > > 1. Educate developers in terms of making them aware of the importance of
> > > Usability / UX
> >
> > > From my experience during the last months, this is less needed at the
> > moment. Why? To me ...
> >      * the core developers do ping us regularly
> >      * they provide means to basically follow their development (e.g.
> >        daily builds, commit messages, ... provided for QA, Design and
> >        others)
> >      * the suggest new developers to get our feedback on their ideas
> >
> > So, unless we are able to handle _all_ their requests quite fast and
> > accurately, there is no need to further promote this topic. Instead, we
> > should try to answer all the (open) requests on e.g. the ux-advise list
> > - or help with classifying / resolving Design related bugzilla issues. I
> > mean ... before asking for more requests we might not be able to handle
> > properly.
> >
> > (Well, I know that I've missed to invest time there as well.)
> >
> > > 2. Provide a structure to us designers to produce consitent UIs and
> > workflows.
> >
> > That is the one I'd focus on (referring to the "consistent UI") ... and
> > there is plenty to do.
> >
> > Any other opinions?
>
> I mostly agree with this.
> However, the point of the principles is not only to produce consistent UIs
> and workflows, but also to be able to evaluate and improve upon our designs
> using a standard set of guidelines.
> If we discover faults or unnecessary vagueness within the principles, which
> we no doubt will, we should adjust the principles accordingly.

I do fully agree.

To me, the most important part is to consider that all the principles
are valid at the same time - although being sometimes contradictory. So
the actual design problem "varies" the importance / influence of each of
the principles. Consequently, these aren't strict rules, but ... as you
said ... guidelines.

> I hope that it's alright if I integrate the principles into our workflow
> (with a simple "Designs will be checked against our design principles."
> line).

I'm basically fine with it - how about "Design proposals will be
evaluated according our design principles."

More proposals ...

How about renaming the "Ethos" page [1] to "Design Principles" (seems
simpler to me, since the page itself talks about principles).

And, I'm not sure if we really need the tags. How about renaming them to
make them more "human readable" (e.g. "ux-discovery" -> "Discovery
Principle").

(If you give me a "go", then I'll update the page accordingly".


Are there additional thoughts with regard to Björn's question?


Thanks to you both for this first step ...

Cheers,
Christoph

[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Ethos


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to design+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted