[MG] Difference bridge layout proposal

[Thomas von der Elbe]

Hello,

On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 1:54, Michael Allan wrote:
> There's lots to comment on. I look at my dev priorities (1 usability,
> 2 attracting users and 3 scaling) and I guess this falls under 3; our
> basic stage design allows the user to construct different combinations
> of central scenes and peripheral tracks. We can therefore accomodate
> the preferences of any user which is one requirement of scaling.

In my view Conseo's ideas are also very much for 1 usability and 2 
attracting users, especially the horizontal bridge-layout. I think, for 
now the best would be, if we could come out with a combined version of 
your two proposals, instead of two competing ones.


On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:39, conseo wrote:
> the communications feed track. I have created smilies for that. 

I like the smilies much more than the half-moons. It makes it clear that 
it is about humans. Also the colouring is more mild to the eyes imo.

> #3 has already been patched in a previous session.

That is an interesting use-case. When would that happen? When would you 
come to the bridge and see an old already matched diff? If I think of 
something like a diff-history or just an old diff-link, wouldn't it then 
be better to still show the different texts and just make somehow clear 
that by now this has changed?

> 2) http://whiletaker.homeip.net/mockups/diffbridge/8/8b.xht
> Show the footings. I have aligned them ascending, to emphasize that it 
> is a
> different dimension (orthogonal information) and also underline the 
> direction of votespace.

I like the idea of including the names of the authors, i.e. the titles 
of the drafts, into the layout of the footings. But all together it 
looks to confusing to me atm. The ascending is not necessary imo and it 
would look more like in the current vote-space if it was horizontally. 
Which by the way is why I like the horizontal bridge-layout so much: it 
is like a zoomed in piece of the vote-space (and to some degree this 
also applies to a future circular vote-space imo).

> Parallel voters for Ed. and Bu. are left out for now to avoid 
> confusion. You
> can directly navigate to other differences by hitting the white 
> difference
> symbols on the left of Mi. and on the right of Ed. Do you think this 
> is handy?

I like the clickable difference symbols a lot too, but I see problems. 
Some of the most important diffs will be to your co-voters, I guess, 
which are missing here. And the ones to your candidates co-voters, which 
are missing in Mike's version too.

How, if we had one of Mikes footings atop each draft in the bridge, i.e. 
two of them? This way we could navigate from within the bridge to truly 
every diff of the tree. Maybe to much?

Btw, co-voters can easily count up to 15 or so.

> 3) http://whiletaker.homeip.net/mockups/diffbridge/8/8c.xht
> Click (pin) a communication element. The toolbar icon for communication
> (bubble) is highlighted and the sender of the post is shown on the right
> caption. Either the communication bubble icon or the text itself opens 
> the
> original post in a new tab.

Thats cool!

> 4) http://whiletaker.homeip.net/mockups/diffbridge/8/8d.xht
> Ed. bridges the second difference, text and bridge-button
> immediately turn green and the patch operation is previewed.

I like the preview-idea. Maybe it could get a bit more clear, that at 
this point it is still just a preview and must still be accepted. Maybe 
"Save preview" on top instead of "Accept selected"?
The sliders look a bit confusing to my eyes. hm ...

>
> 5) http://whiletaker.homeip.net/mockups/diffbridge/8/8e.xht
> Ed hovers the first difference and all communication items relating to 
> this
> difference are highlighted in its colour in the feed track.

Yes, good idea!

Thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.zelea.com/list/votorola/attachments/20120217/d17eb2bb/attachment.html>