[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Single vs Multi Window KControl
From:       Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date:       2004-07-31 23:17:11
Message-ID: 200407312317.11564.frans.englich () telia ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Hello everyone,

Whether KControl should be Single Window(SW) or Multi window(MW) is crucial to 
how our future KControl will look like. Currently, I think a multi window 
approach is best. Here's why:


* If we go for SW by having the navigation mechanism positioned outside the 
module viewing area(as our current kcontrol) it is hard to make KControl live 
up to the 800x600 requirement[1] and also have a good navigation mechanism. 
An MW approach, as the two currently proposed, easily lives up to that KDE UI 
Guidelines paragraph.


* If we go for SW by fully hiding the navigation layout(which will be 
necessary if an effective navigation such as large icons, is to be used while 
being usable on 800x600) we take a major hit in consistency. This and the 
next paragraph is the major reasons to why I prefer SW. For the same reason 
we disables menu entries instead of hiding them, we should keep the 
navigation as static as possible:
    * It makes learning easier
    * It makes navigation easier since time is not spent on relocation
    * It provides a feeling of solidness and comfortness; the navigation is 
stable, looks the same, and is a "reference spot" the user always know. It 
never suddenly disappears, and will always be visible behind the 
configuration dialog since they are smaller than the main window.

* MW means faster navigation since the navigation mechanism is not hidden(not 
faster as in how the user physically interacts, but the need of scanning the 
interface).
Having the content of categories as an icon list in the configuration 
dialog[2] has the same drawback. The category cannot be viewed without 
opening a dialog and that makes Trial&Rrror and navigation in general much 
slower. However, the positive side is the "main" navigation then can be made 
simpler, but I think the cost is too high. I solved it by adding an 
additional icon view[3] -- the window is still small and the layout is 
simple.


* Xandros' CTO explicitly states in an interview they prefer MW in 
KControl[2]. I don't know why they prefer it, but that is a vote for MW from 
a major linux distributor which targets regular users.


* Someone stated MW is confusing for new users. Having a MW KControl  is just 
as confusing as the desktop in general -- the window paradigm is fundamental. 
We have dialogs, messages boxes, wizards and so forth ad infinitum -- if 
that's ok, it must be alright with it in KControl too. It's like ordinary 
configuration dialogs, not worse. Remember, the configuration dialogs are, 
just as the ordinary ones, smaller than the main window, and always above the 
main window -- the former gives a sense of control, and the latter ensures 
they don't "dissapear" behind the main window.


In other words, I prefer MW because SW hinders efficient navigation, not 
because it allows /multiple/ configuration dialogs -- as someone pointed out 
that is used by power users, and I would like to emphasize that aspect should 
not rule our decision.

Could someone who preferrably is pro SW, correct/extend this email?


			Frans


Footnotes
---------

1.
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/standards/kde/style/basics/windows.html#win_size

2.
Icon list on configuration dialog:
http://www.csh.rit.edu/~benjamin/kcontrol4/screenshots/desktop.png

3.
kdenonbeta/kcontrol4(icon size needs adjustment):
http://www.kde-look.org/content/files/14848-kcontrol4.png

4.
Interview with Xandros CTO:
http://dot.kde.org/1083922704/
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]