[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: <heh>, <marcs>, <ravi>, <roger>, <tribble>
- Subject: Interface Extensions
- From: Bob Perez <bobp>
- Date: Mon, 25 Sep 89 13:55:44 PDT
- Cc: <bobp>, <us>
Actually, I'm not really worried about featuritis -- you guys
are all obviously quite good at setting reasonable limits. My
"feature frenzy" comment was just a meta-observation from a strongly
biased observer who desperately wants a working copy of InfoFactory
I agree completely that elegant extensions to the standard Macintosh
interface can be found and are worth exploring. That these are
rare should not necessarily deter us, and I am not dogmatic about
this, but my skepticism level rises dramatically when contemplating
changes to the way in which fundamental file operations such
as Save, Revert, and the like, are handled.
Good extensions I've seen are consistent with the underlying
themes inherent in the model being extended. E.g., triple-clicking
in text selection as an obvious extension to double-clicking.
The really best ideas concern themselves more with the underlying
principles of good interface design, rather than a strict adherence
to the rules themselves, or a blind loyalty to the implements
of the interface themselves. In fact, bad extensions frequently
seem as though they were extracted from some kind of Interface
Construction Set: an icon here, a button there, but with no thought
behind the usage.
Thus, Silicon Beach Software's use of thumbwheels in Super3D
represents a very nice alternative to scrollbars, and a fabulous
example of how the use of real-world metaphors almost always
works well. Placing a disk icon in the trash to eject a disk,
on the other hand, is a really BAD, poorly thought-out "extension".
I got fairly excited about your idea of using inclusion lists
themselves to represent an historical trace, but apparently the
idea's been previously considered -- I hope we can pursue this.
I strongly favor Roger's notion of some sort of graphical representation
(perhaps this is a 1.1, or even 2.0 addition). I'm not sure a
tree is the best way to represent the notion, but if it is, I
really like the way Terri's handled user-traversible trees in
her genealogical application.
Finally, although I was a badge-bearing deputy in Apple's Interface
Police for years, I'm not necessarily married to their Human
Interface Guidelines, particularly across product platforms.
Since we have a wider constituency than just Macintosh users,
it's important to consider the broader issues relevant to all
of our users, including Sun and Windows users (although I have
no idea what sort of standards exist in those communities). Greg's
suggestions regarding vi conventions, for example, seem quite
appropriate for vi users.
PS (Questions for: Roger->what kind of interface do we expect
to be predominant among our Sun customers? and Ravi->are there
published interface guidelines for Windows?)