
|
[openbeos]
||
[Date Prev]
[07-2003 Date Index]
[Date Next]
||
[Thread Prev]
[07-2003 Thread Index]
[Thread Next]
[openbeos] Re: [Open-beos-cvs]CVS:current/src/prefs/datatranslationsDataTranslationsWindow.cpp,1.2,1.3
- From: Assimil8or <daniel_furrer@xxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 03 Jul 2003 21:17:31 +0200
Creating UI Guidelines doesn't mean that there need to be any new APIs,
but (as I understand this) some kind of a documentation for developers
on how a good application could look like and what's important when they
want to make a app with a consistent UI. It could also just be a ordered
collection of screenshots.
thx
Daniel "Assimil8or" Furrer
Am Don, 2003-07-03 um 15.02 schrieb Michael Phipps:
> I agree. I think that BAlert is a good example. Here is a quick.easy to use,
> standard "hey - look at this" window.
> No one has to use it. The UI police won't come and take you away if you don't.
> But those things are so seductive... Most coders are looking at a problem
> that has to be solved:
> "oh - what if the file has been deleted before I opened it" or something.
> BAlert is a 10 second solution to their problem.
> BAboutBox would be the same kind of thing. Seductive because it is so simple
> to add to the app.
>
> For R2+ (which is really where this thread should be), I think that what we
> need to ask ourself is "how many apps could use this potential API addition?".
> Is the value to enough developers that it is worth adding another
> class/kit/whatever to the API. Since almost every app should have an about
> box, I would think that the answer on this one would be yes.
>
> >i remember frequent responses to this type of question. jean-louis'
> >answer was always a derivative of this:
> >
> >we do not imply nor enforce any user interface guidlines - your
> >applications are yours and you should know best how your users should
> >see them.
> >
> >personally i think the Fearless Leader was right. if user interface
> >guidlines ARE created, they should only be done for small subsets of
> >applications. ie: the prefrences windows should all look similar. it
> >should be considered detrimental if userinterface guidlines are drafted
> >as a broad and sweeping mandate
> >
> >now with my knee-jerk response done.... i think that example windows
> >like BeAboutBox would be a good idea. examples, but not really
> >rules...seems UnBe to me - thats all
> >
> >-jared
>
>
>
|

|