As a totally random butting into this thread--I like Nick's thought. Maybe it is a glass of milk. You click it and it animates slight to look like it is being drunk before everything disappears.
Or maybe it's an animal that is known for hiding. LIke a tiny hedgehog. Spammily yours, Seb On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Nick Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jumping in here without reading the whole thread.... > You could consider doing something fun with the button, and really centering > the experience around it. For me, clicking that button is my measure of > progress; clicking it is always satisfying. Something like "DONE!" or > "MELKED!" might be a fun to explain and highlight that part of the workflow. > Nick > > On Sep 16, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Luke Tucker wrote: > > > I think "hiding" does have a learning curve no matter how we choose to > present it and overall we need better materials and explanations. Lately, > I've been thinking a short screencast would go a long way for a lot of the > kookier bits of melkjug's UI. > That said, for me, of all the alternatives "a button with the word hide on > it" is probably the clearest we can be for an initial experience, followed > by "x-as-in-close" (say... a non-red X). Lightbulb on/off is fine once you > know what it does, but for me it initially says "tip" or "information" > without suggesting action. I agree "x-as-in-delete" suggests too much > overall. > I'm willing to give "a button with the word hide on it" a go as long as it > isn't ugly and distracting. Longer term, I'm concerned that even > presented with the word "hide", it's not initially obvious why you would > want to do that anyway... > - Luke > On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:37 PM, Sonali Sridhar wrote: > > I agree with Phil on this - I dont think its worth going down the complex > route of symbols (the eye, bulb etc.) as its really not universal. Just the > simple word "HIDE" will be helpful. I think its important that we start > moving away from "X" as that really might make the user feel like they are > deleting the reading vs. closing it. > > On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Philip Ashlock wrote: > > I'd be in favor of a button that just read "Hide" over an "X", the button > could possibly be styled the same way the "Edit" button for filters > currently is. > > Rolando Penate wrote: > > Though I certainly think it is clever, I can see how the lightbulb could be > confusing. For clarity, I suppose what we're looking for here is a 'hide' > metaphor then? > On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Philip Ashlock wrote: > > I don't think this can be accurately tested until there's some provision for > explicitly explaining what the lightbulb means and does (this could be a > tooltip of some sort on hover as well as a bold simple explanation when > someone is first learning how to use the site). The problem with the > lightbulb is that it represents an action that people rarely need to > conceptualize, so it's nearly impossible to symbolize it in an intuitive way > without that little hump of a learning curve. An "X" is a very common symbol > that represents an action that people use all the time and intuitively means > delete when in the context of a list of content and close in the context of > a UI element like a window or a modal dialogue. > > > Joshua Bronson wrote: > > Yesterday Julia and I went over the Melkjug demo we'll be giving to CMU > students on Thursday. It turns out I'm not the only one without enough > imagination for the click-the-lighbulb-to-close metaphor to make immediate > sense. I suppose that brings us up to $0.04 in the > lets-just-stick-to-the-good-old-fashioned-tried-and-true-x pot? > > > > -- > Nick Grossman > The Open Planning Project -- http://topp.openplans.org > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (917) 825-6590 > > > -- Archive: http://www.openplans.org/projects/melkjug/lists/melkjug-development-list/archive/2008/09/1221681489776 To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions.
