Re: [Usability] The eternal fileselector dilemma :)

[Lemmit Kaplinski <lemmit kaplinski com>]

Hi,
Kalle Vahlman wrote:

> > Ahh - where does this come from? HIG? Usability studies?
> >    
>
> It's my interpetation of how the system is supposed to work. If the
> bookmarks don't have the exact location, they probably include the
>  
Ok, I see your reasoning here and I'd say I mostly agree - a decent 
collection of bookmarks should minimize the amount of scrolling andthe 
percieved depth of the target. I also hope that you agree on _my_ 
conclusion that in order to minimize scrolling, you have to maximize the 
number of subfolders visible at a time. At least try to get above the 5. 
I do not think that we should worry about having too many files visible 
at a time though ;)

> > So it is actually not a dialog with extra options hidden. It is two
> > dialogs rolled into one.
> >    
>
> I'd say it is a dialog that includes a plan B, but that's subjective.
>  
But when you switch to plan B, you ditch the A one. You cannot have it 
both ways (Well - an example. If you try to rob a bank and have a 
getaway car waiting, and the cops get suspicious and check out the guy 
while you are stuffing cash into a backpack, you will use the emergency 
exit. You do not care about the car anymore. I know these kinds of 
examples are dangerous, but it does illustrate my point)

> It would fail on the consistency front, and I do agree with those who
> say that consistency is a virtue. However, your suggeestion is not
> that bad otherwise.
>  
Ok. Despite disagreements on several fronts, everyone who has voiced 
opinion in this thread has agreed, that things could be done better. 
Which sounds like a plan, but as I mentioned earlier, I am unaware how 
to continue (other than going on in this list forever). There is 
momentum for redesigning the chooser and I am willing to do the dirty 
work of collecting opinions, analyzing and formatting them and 
presenting the results. If there is a point that is.

> Basicly, the difference is (according to my understanding) that a tree
> ties sequental objects to a parent-child relation and spatial model
> does not. So in spatial, there cannot be an "up" button, since there's
> no defined "up" to go to. In spatial the object is located by its
> attributes and such.
I will do some reading and we will coninue this some time in another thread?

The best,

L.