Re: Re: Requirements Doc

Posted by TimJ on Tue Nov 17 21:49:16 1998

In Reply to: Re: Requirements Doc posted by TimP on November 17, 1998 at 20:15:34:

> 4.buttons are buttons (they roll-over, and are graphical).
> NO, NO, NO......
> the beauty of the current site is that it only uses the following graphics:

> 1. redball.gif - For write operations
> 2. greenball.gif - For read operations
> 3. up arrow - To go up the directory tree
> 4. right arrow - To continue
> 5. panerislogo.gi - branding

but the fact that you have to tell us what they mean indicates that they don't do their job. remember 'a pic is worth 1000 words'?, well a good navigation button is worth a paragraph.

>This is why the system is so fast.

we will have to make a small compromise here.

>Also the logs are easily analysed in terms of where people
>actually went, at the moment, whereas loads of graphics will clog them up.

surely your log anaylser can easily filter out the pics.

>Can't we put more effort into formatting using HTML rather than graphics?

difficult (and you end up with bigger html than you graphics are (much)). consider:
is represented by 4 bits in a 16 color gif.

>I know I am onto a looser here.

sorry, but pics are important to the web, for better or wores.
>
>Anyway, the main point I want to add is that we should get away from the idea of
>THE paneris interface. It is highly likely that I will continue to
>use the current interface, not because I like it, but because I know it.

cool. I agree we need several 'views', I would like to see a 'messageboards only' view.

>There is absolutly nothing to say that the current interface should remain the
>default interface for casual browsers, but I would not want to lose either the current interface
>or the Dos interface, as I find them intuitive and fast and useful.

cool. the important thing is the default interface as 90% of users do not change their default settings (even for their desktop environment).

>To enable the multiplicity of views of Paneris is neither difficult nor costly in terms of cpu time,
>so lets keep it varied and personalisable.

sure.

TimJ

Follow Ups:

• Re: Re: Re: Requirements Doc TimP Tue Nov 17 23:32:29 1998 (1)
  • Re: Re: Re: Re: Requirements Doc TimJ Wed Nov 18 8:46:08 1998 (0)
  
  

  ---

  Post a Followup

  Name:

  E-Mail:

  Copy:

  Circulation: AlexH ColinR DanielH JackM JennyP KeithH KrugerD MikeC MylesC NicR PatickG TimJ TimP WilliamC WilliamS paneris

  Subject:

  >> 4.buttons are buttons (they roll-over, and are graphical). >> NO, NO, NO...... >> the beauty of the current site is that it only uses the following graphics: >> 1. redball.gif - For write operations >> 2. greenball.gif - For read operations >> 3. up arrow - To go up the directory tree >> 4. right arrow - To continue >> 5. panerislogo.gi - branding >but the fact that you have to tell us what they mean indicates that they don't do their job. remember 'a pic is worth 1000 words'?, well a good navigation button is worth a paragraph. >>This is why the system is so fast. >we will have to make a small compromise here. >>Also the logs are easily analysed in terms of where people >>actually went, at the moment, whereas loads of graphics will clog them up. >surely your log anaylser can easily filter out the pics. >>Can't we put more effort into formatting using HTML rather than graphics? >difficult (and you end up with bigger html than you graphics are (much)). consider: ><td bgcolor="#000000" width=1 height=1></td> is represented by 4 bits in a 16 color gif. >>I know I am onto a looser here. >sorry, but pics are important to the web, for better or wores. >> >>Anyway, the main point I want to add is that we should get away from the idea of >><strong>THE</strong> paneris interface. It is highly likely that I will continue to >>use the current interface, not because I like it, but because I know it. >cool. I agree we need several 'views', I would like to see a 'messageboards only' view. >>There is absolutly nothing to say that the current interface should remain the >>default interface for casual browsers, but I would not want to lose either the current interface >>or the Dos interface, as I find them intuitive and fast and useful. >cool. the important thing is the default interface as 90% of users do not change their default settings (even for their desktop environment). >>To enable the multiplicity of views of Paneris is neither difficult nor costly in terms of cpu time, >>so lets keep it varied and personalisable. >sure. >TimJ

  ---

  [ Follow Ups ] [ Post a Followup ] [ Discussions at the Paneris newbox node ]