Mailing List Archive

P.S.

I'll just send these to the devel list, to avoid excessive cross-post spam.

-Aaron

---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------



On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:

> Hey folks,
>
> David and I have been discussing some possible interface tweaks over the last few days, based on observations made here at Denison. Some we like, others we're not so sure about. I'd love to hear what others think about them. One or two of these are already represented in lighthouse, and some have changed a ton since I entered the bugs; I'll do a full cleanup pass there was I get more feedback.
>
> My next few messages will break out the suggestions into separate threads for discussion purposes. Some mockup images are included inline - my apologies if that doesn't jive with your email client.
>
> -Aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Aaron Fuleki
> Senior Web Architect
> Denison University
> 740.587.5752
> ---------------------------------
>

Ack. The listserv stripped all of my mockups. I'll post those elsewhere ASAP.

-Aaron

---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------



On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:

> P.S.
>
> I'll just send these to the devel list, to avoid excessive cross-post spam.
>
> -Aaron
>
> ---------------------------------
> Aaron Fuleki
> Senior Web Architect
> Denison University
> 740.587.5752
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> David and I have been discussing some possible interface tweaks over the last few days, based on observations made here at Denison. Some we like, others we're not so sure about. I'd love to hear what others think about them. One or two of these are already represented in lighthouse, and some have changed a ton since I entered the bugs; I'll do a full cleanup pass there was I get more feedback.
>>
>> My next few messages will break out the suggestions into separate threads for discussion purposes. Some mockup images are included inline - my apologies if that doesn't jive with your email client.
>>
>> -Aaron
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Aaron Fuleki
>> Senior Web Architect
>> Denison University
>> 740.587.5752
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>

On Apr 4, 2011, at 8:27 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:

> Ack. The listserv stripped all of my mockups. I'll post those elsewhere ASAP.

Great, thanks. What file type were they? They should not have been stripped…

David

On 2011-04-04, at 11:27 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:

> Ack. The listserv stripped all of my mockups. I'll post those elsewhere ASAP.

Was wondering... ;)

--
Phillip Smith
http://phillipadsmith.com
http://twitter.com/phillipadsmith
http://linkedin.com/in/phillipadsmith

On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:
> My next few messages will break out the suggestions into separate threads for discussion purposes. Some mockup images are included inline - my apologies if that doesn't jive with your email client.

For those who are interested, the descriptions and screenshots can be seen here:

https://github.com/bricoleurs/bricolage/wiki/Proposed-UX-Changes:-Story-Profile

-Aaron

---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------

If I understand what I see in the link below, I'd say that related media elements
at the bottom should be draggable. Your settings are just for a simple story. Imagine
a cover page with many text element, links, and of course images...

Zdravko


Aaron Fuleki wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:
>> My next few messages will break out the suggestions into separate threads for discussion purposes. Some mockup images are included inline - my apologies if that doesn't jive with your email client.
>
> For those who are interested, the descriptions and screenshots can be seen here:
>
> https://github.com/bricoleurs/bricolage/wiki/Proposed-UX-Changes:-Story-Profile
>
> -Aaron
>
> ---------------------------------
> Aaron Fuleki
> Senior Web Architect
> Denison University
> 740.587.5752
> ---------------------------------
>

On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Zdravko Balorda wrote:
> If I understand what I see in the link below, I'd say that related media elements
> at the bottom should be draggable. Your settings are just for a simple story. Imagine
> a cover page with many text element, links, and of course images...

I disagree. The more complicated a user interface becomes (bigger story, more elements, more levels of nesting, etc.), the more crucial standard conventions like consistent placement and familiarity become. Contravening those standards should only be considered when there's a demonstrable benefit.

Furthermore, order has no bearing on a related story or media object with respect to its parent element within bricolage. Allowing users to drag something around that they can't actually reorder will just frustrate and annoy them, as it introduces greater inconsistency.

We must not be using the same vocabulary here or something. Simon said it way better than I did, anyways.

-Aaron


P.S. I admit that the mockups do make relations *look* like elements, even though they aren't really elements in the database. However, I think the greater visual consistency and reduced UI noise are great benefits, and far outweigh any possible confusion.

---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------

Hi everybody,

I'm going to try the explanation again, for the sake of the mail
archives if nothing else.

In any Bricolage element (a top-level one like a story or a media
document, or a subelement) you can have the following:

1. As many fields as you like, in whichever order you like.
2. As many subelements as you like, in whichever order you like.
3. One related story, or zero.
4. One related media documents, or zero.

Related media and related stories do not appear in the flow of fields
and subelements.

Now, to clear up a few things:

1. Yes, you can put as many pictures in a story (or a photo gallery, or
any other kind of document) as you like.
2. Yes, you can change the order of those pictures.
3. You do this with subelements, each of which has one related media
document.
4. Subelements are the things you sort and order in the interface.


Here's how it might go. Suppose you want to make a photo gallery.

1. Make a story element type called "Gallery."
2. Make a subelement type called "Picture in gallery." Tick the "related
media" box, which allows one (1) media document to be related to each
"Picture in gallery" subelement.
3. Edit the "Gallery" element type to add the "Picture in gallery"
subelement type.
4. Now you create a new "Gallery" story.
5. Add a "Picture in gallery" subelement to it, uploading a photo.
6. Repeat step 5 until you have all the photos you want.
7. Drag your "Picture in gallery" subelements around to get the order
just the way you like it.


The key thing to note here is that each "Picture in gallery" subelement
has either one or zero related media documents, and never more than
one.

The concept of ordering the related media inside a single "Picture in
gallery" subelement makes no sense. What does make sense is changing the
order of those "Picture in gallery" subelements themselves.


I hope this is a little bit helpful. Long story short, Zdravko, Aaron is
not suggesting that we throw away any existing functionality. He's just
suggesting a cleaner layout for the functionality we already have.


Hope this makes sense,

Bret



On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 10:49 -0400, Aaron Fuleki wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Zdravko Balorda wrote:
> > If I understand what I see in the link below, I'd say that related media elements
> > at the bottom should be draggable. Your settings are just for a simple story. Imagine
> > a cover page with many text element, links, and of course images...
>
> I disagree. The more complicated a user interface becomes (bigger story, more elements, more levels of nesting, etc.), the more crucial standard conventions like consistent placement and familiarity become. Contravening those standards should only be considered when there's a demonstrable benefit.
>
> Furthermore, order has no bearing on a related story or media object with respect to its parent element within bricolage. Allowing users to drag something around that they can't actually reorder will just frustrate and annoy them, as it introduces greater inconsistency.
>
> We must not be using the same vocabulary here or something. Simon said it way better than I did, anyways.
>
> -Aaron
>
>
> P.S. I admit that the mockups do make relations *look* like elements, even though they aren't really elements in the database. However, I think the greater visual consistency and reduced UI noise are great benefits, and far outweigh any possible confusion.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Aaron Fuleki
> Senior Web Architect
> Denison University
> 740.587.5752
> ---------------------------------

--
Bret Dawson
Producer
Pectopah Productions Inc.
(416) 895-7635
bret@pectopah.com
www.pectopah.com

On Apr 6, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Bret Dawson wrote:
<snip>
> suggesting a cleaner layout for the functionality we already have.
</snip>

brett->beer();

-Aaron

---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------

On Apr 6, 2011, at 7:49 AM, Aaron Fuleki wrote:

> Furthermore, order has no bearing on a related story or media object with respect to its parent element within bricolage. Allowing users to drag something around that they can't actually reorder will just frustrate and annoy them, as it introduces greater inconsistency.
>
> We must not be using the same vocabulary here or something. Simon said it way better than I did, anyways.

Yes, avoid the use of "Parent" in this context. A related media (or story) does not have a parent; It's a part of an element, like the name of the element, and not like its subelements.

And yes, Simon said it very clearly. Zdravko, did Simon's post in the "Bric2 UX Tweaks: Simplify the related media/story section of container elements." thread help you?

Best,

David

On Apr 6, 2011, at 8:33 AM, Bret Dawson wrote:

> The key thing to note here is that each "Picture in gallery" subelement
> has either one or zero related media documents, and never more than
> one.
>
> The concept of ordering the related media inside a single "Picture in
> gallery" subelement makes no sense. What does make sense is changing the
> order of those "Picture in gallery" subelements themselves.
>
>
> I hope this is a little bit helpful. Long story short, Zdravko, Aaron is
> not suggesting that we throw away any existing functionality. He's just
> suggesting a cleaner layout for the functionality we already have.

Well said, thanks!

David

>> One thought about these, though: If the related assets are to get their
>> own "twisties," we'll probably also need to have a preference for
>> whether those twisties are open or closed by default.
<snip>

> I think I'd go for:
>
> * Open if no associated document
> * Closed if associated document

Agreed.

-Aaron


---------------------------------
Aaron Fuleki
Senior Web Architect
Denison University
740.587.5752
---------------------------------

Bret Dawson wrote:
>
> The key thing to note here is that each "Picture in gallery" subelement
> has either one or zero related media documents, and never more than
> one.

True.
>
> The concept of ordering the related media inside a single "Picture in
> gallery" subelement makes no sense. What does make sense is changing the
> order of those "Picture in gallery" subelements themselves.
>

True

>
> I hope this is a little bit helpful. Long story short, Zdravko, Aaron is
> not suggesting that we throw away any existing functionality. He's just
> suggesting a cleaner layout for the functionality we already have.
>

Right. I see. Thank you. Order of media document within an element of
Related Media type makes no sense, of course. If one add five related
stories to a story, then they could be reordered. Aaron, sorry for the mess.

Regards, Zdravko.