Much as I think interfaces like this are way kewl, I think it is
revealing that nobody has successfully applied this sort of approach
to browsing the large hierarchy that many of us interact with on a
daily basis - the file system on our computer. Those efforts that
have been made have not caught on (remember the flyby navigation in
Jurassic Park? - http://www.slipups.com/items/2786.html ).
In the same way, there have been a slew of attempts to display search
engine results in forms other than Google's list of top hits, but
none have caught on -- people know how to interpret lists, but often
struggle with graphical displays of information, much to the chagrin
of the people who make cool interfaces.
Much as I think EoL might indeed make a splash with something like
this, it will be empty unless it actually helps people find things
without getting lost. In the same way, I thought the tree navigation
shown in the EoL release video was perhaps the worst possible way of
doing things, ignoring pretty much everything people have written
about navigating in large trees.
Regards
Rod
On 14 Sep 2007, at 03:52, Rebecca Shapley wrote:
My guess -
a) there aren't many information sets that are difficult enough to
present in standard ways AND benefit from this type of presentation
b) there haven't been enough of (a) with the programmers/money/
willingness to try something novel
c) some concern over limiting the audience for the info, because it
requires Flash or some other plug-in. Potentially a high bar in
terms of browser capability, internet connection, etc. Or because
Flash isn't open-source.
To get around (c), I'd take this implementation as a spec for the
desired interaction behavior and see if it can be done in any other
more acceptable technology, OR if it can be primarily Flash-based,
but also degrade to something acceptable for older browsers.
No reason the EOL project can't make a splash with something as
exciting as this.
-R.
On 9/13/07, Richard Pyle < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As Rod suggested, this is pretty old news.
This begs the question: has this style of user-interface failed to
catch on
more widely because of:
1) Technological limitations;
2) Insufficient creativity and inspiration; or
3) Insufficient usability?
I'm tempted to eliminate #3 on the grounds that I don't think this
style of
UI has been widespread enough to have been subjected to, and then
failed,
some sort of usability meta-experiment.
This is not to say that it won't ultimately fail such a meta-
experiment --
just that it hasn't really had a chance to fail it yet.
Rich
_______________________________________________
tdwg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg
_______________________________________________
tdwg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg
----------------------------------------
Professor Roderic D. M. Page
Editor, Systematic Biology
DEEB, IBLS
Graham Kerr Building
University of Glasgow
Glasgow G12 8QP
United Kingdom
Phone: +44 141 330 4778
Fax: +44 141 330 2792
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/rod.html
iChat: aim://rodpage1962
reprints: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/pubs.html
Subscribe to Systematic Biology through the Society of Systematic
Biologists Website: http://systematicbiology.org
Search for taxon names: http://darwin.zoology.gla.ac.uk/~rpage/portal/
Find out what we know about a species: http://ispecies.org
Rod's rants on phyloinformatics: http://iphylo.blogspot.com
Rod's rants on ants: http://semant.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
tdwg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg
