[Usability] Re: making the conceptual model more concrete

["David Adam Bordoley" <bordoley msu edu>]

Daniel Borgmann writes: 

> How would such a document UI translate to applications which don't
> operate on documents? Like a media player, a game or even a web browser.
> I always wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to make a clear cut
> between the two models and make document handlers document centric and
> other applications application centric.

Media players are document centric. For instance a user opens a folder with 
all their music in it. The most natural way to present this information to 
the user is as a media player (ala rb). 

A game could even fit it into this model nicely. Assuming you have a "New" 
menu it could have an option for Game and popup a dialog allowing you to 
choose which game (or possibly a submenu). You could than save that game to 
a folder, and the next time you want to continue the game you simply open 
the existing game from the folder you have saved it to. Alternatively you 
could start a new game from the New menu of course. 

A web browser is tougher, though epiphany's ui shows that a browser can be 
made document like somewhat easily (excluding all the tab stuff, but that 
should really be done in the wm imo). One of my pet peaves of about browsers 
right now is that it takes too many steps to open a page (either 
apps->internet->browser or file->new window/tab) I think the internet is 
ubiquotous enough where having a small text entry to open stuff with from 
the top panel might be justified see this sketch by seth 
http://www.gnome.org/~seth/sketch.png and the OpenApplet in cvs.[1] 

> I believe that this would resemble reality much more closely, both "real
> life" reality (we both work with documents and use devices in our lifes)
> and computing reality (what people practically use their computers for).
> Maybe I just completely misunderstood you. If the Applications menu
> would indeed be replaced with a New menu, how would I open a game or
> browse to a website? How would I check my dates on a calender? 

I answered some of these above. About the calendar, isn't the most natural 
way to open your calendar to simplay open it. Shouldn't the calendar be a 
desktop object. Similarly instead of a mail app, wouldn't a mail folder on 
the desktop be much more intuitive? [2] 

> Even though Apple has no document UI, I believe that they are somehow
> doing this split with their Aqua and Metal UIs. Everything which doesn't
> handle documents seems to be converted to a Metal UI. Take iCal, iChat,
> iTunes, Finder or even Safari. Some people argue they use the Metal UI 
> just because it looks nifty and break their own HIG[1] on the way, but I

I think this is just a terminology difference. When I say document, I mean 
object, thing etc. It doesn't need to be an actual document, see above, a 
game and folder etc these are all documents (objects). 

> don't really believe that... A web browser for example might not
> resemble a digital device, but it still functions more like a virtual
> digital device, not like a document. Same for the finder, iCal, etc.

This isn't really true about web browsers. Web browsers manipulate 
documents. Though the line does blur abit because its impossible to create a 
1-to-1 relationship between documents and their views, but this can be 
worked around. I guess I see a web browser as a document viewer where you 
can change what is viewed. 

> [1] http://makeashorterlink.com/?F52916525 

Brushed metal is really ugly uggghhh... 

dave 

[1] Not to advertise my own little immature project or anything :)
[2] This is very much how the palm presents these interfaces to the user. In 
fact the palm pilot is very document like, and does a good job at hiding the 
application implementation details.