Here´s my take:

I haven´t got much time to read all the paperwork you´ve done so far so in a way I am new to Chandler.
This is why I might propose things that you have already thought of, and on the other hand, don´t know that Chandler has already a feature.

Although I am Computer literate I haven´t thought at first what the current implementation of Chandler could do,
That is to say to overlay calendars.
The notion of switching calendars you can grasp it without reading a manual, but the notion of overlaying is another thing.
I for once didn´t.

On the other hand if it´s worth it I believe we should break some rules if it makes a GUI better, although it might need some teaching or getting accustomed to.
This time, before opening my big mouth, I took the time to read all the thread and although I must agree with almost every mail, I do agree with Mimi´s position.
I believe in a) clarity, b) not cluttering, c) in speed also.

So as I see it these are my answers for each proposal
 

1. Just checkboxes, no collection icons
Dull but works out of the box (+1)
2. Special case calendar so that clicking on collection names  automatically-checks the collection (like iCal)
I would not know if I would always like all the calendars overlay just by clicking. I guess I would have to play to realize if I prefer it or not (0)
3. Add a 4th column of checkboxes (See comp below)
I hate this, although it works (-1) (too much clutter)
4. Animation to reveal the checkbox widget underneath the collection  icon (Submitted in previous email)
I agree with the fact that an animation is too distracting. Although I think an eye is a good metaphor, I do not like how it looks (-1) (subjective)
5. Sliding tongue to cover the collection icon with the checkbox  widget. Checked state re-reveals the collection icon (Proposed in  this email)
It´s really nice, much more clear and attractive, it doesn´t consume real state, but I would definitively would like to give it a try in a mock up to see how do I react to it to see if it feels natural and intuitive.
One thing is to rationalize it, even see it in a browser, the other, to use it. (+2)

What I feel distracts me more is the fact that the trash is with the other collections.
For me this is much worse and counterintuitive.
If I could only see the collections in the side bar I would prefer it much more (please reed my past emails on this topics).

I envision I could have different calendars for different tasks, projects or persons.
For example:


a) one for calls to be made that day
b) one for special projects (like chandler)
c) one for my day trading
d) one for my wife´s calendar
e) one for my son´s calendar at school
f) one for going out (appointments)

This way I would be sticking much more to GTD concept I believe and could switch only the info I need to when I have to melt one with another or simply see whats important at this same moment.
This seems to me to make much more sense,
I think people would 80% of the time switch calendars using this concept and maybe 20% of the time trying to make two calendars work together.
Chandlers should be for simplifying not making things worse! and more cluttered.
Maybe this is why I have a negative feeling towards stickies in a calendar view.

Yours with respect,

Daniel
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design

Reply via email to