Re: [HIG] Mini-Guidelines content

At 1:33 PM +0100 8/7/01, Calum Benson wrote:
colin z robertson wrote:

 If we have time to fit it in then I wouldn't have any objections. It
 looks like it could easily get quite big though. Should we perhaps
 have a list of essential and optional topics for the mini-guidelines?

I agree. I really only have one suggestion on the below list, and it's my problem anyway, so if nobody else has any objections, shall we simply adopt Calum's prioritized outline and go from there?

BTW, I'm going out of town tomorrow, but I will be back online on Tuesday (from Seattle). If nobody objects, let's say that the outline we have on Wednesday afternoon (Pacific time, so say 00:00 UTC Thursday 16 Aug :) is the one we go with.

So, by my reckoning, the current topic list, in no particular order,
looks something like this.  (I've added Os and Es to suggest my opinion
of what's Optional and Essential, although High Priority and Low
Priority might be more accurate...)

(O) Introduction: "Why we care about usability (and so should you)"

(O) Usability Principles

I think we need at least a one-page intro that basically says "Following these guidelines will not automatically make your software 'usable'; you need to design your software from the user's perspective". Maybe just a couple of paragraphs. I just want to make it clear that the guidelines are not a panacea. :)

I think we also need an explanation of why these are "mini-guidelines" and not the full set. I'm happy to write these.

    Menus + Toolbars
 Layout and Aesthetics / Controls and Layout
(O) Terminology
    Keyboard and Mouse Input basics
(O) Reality Checks (aka Doing Simple Usability Testing)

All the above sounds fine to me. I'd be happy to take on any one or two of these, including editing/rewriting the ones that already exist in some form.

Have I missed anything?  It sounds like a reasonable list to me, so as
well as starting to think about who writes what, another couple of
things to consider are:

- at which point we want to circulate things (including the draft
contents list) to the wider usability team for comments, and

I would guess that since we have a decent number of people on this list, and the archives are public, the best thing to do would be to wait to circulate explicitly to the wider list until we have a draft; otherwise we're going to be overwhelmed by comments on the outline before we've even made an attempt to fill it out. (Folks who are not on the core team: please do feel free to comment on these proposals!!!)

- the guidleines format we want to produce-- a styleguide for the
styleguide, in other words, so the bits we all write end up looking like
part of the same document.

This is important, but I think we should keep it fairly simple; we don't want that to overshadow the guidelines content itself.

I'll send a separate note with a proposal for this.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]