Jack Schwartz wrote: > Hi Dave. > > Thanks for your feedback. I see how my original email could have led > one to think: "Why 13 steps and 3 scripts? Seems like a step backward > from a usability standpoint." From your response as well as a few others > (which were verbal) I can see I need to clarify the intent (a specific > use) and general level of need (low) of these scripts, in order to > clarify the ease-of-use level of AI commands. >
And I'm afraid you misunderstand my comments. You've identified a use case which is not, apparently, handled well by the set of tools we've built so far. I don't object to the existence of the scripts *at the moment*, but what I don't want is them to turn into something that's used in lieu of the supported interfaces we've designed. Please examine what you've cooked up and file bugs and RFE's that are appropriate to cover these use cases so that these scripts can go away. That's all I'm asking for now. ... > As for general usability of AI, there is room for improvement, and Ethan > and others have been working on that. That said, it is much better than > my original email may have led some to believe. Hopefully, after this > email, the credibility of AI's commandline interface is restored. > The usability of AI, and indeed all of our components, is something that each and every one of us is responsible for evaluating. Ethan's been assigned to look at this because I think it needs additional focus, but we all need to be asking ourselves all the time, "Is there a better solution to the problem?" Dave
