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

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: HIG
From:       Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date:       2004-09-01 21:56:14
Message-ID: 200409012156.14940.frans.englich () telia ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 26 August 2004 11:03, Jan Muehlig wrote:
> Thanks to aKademy and strong activities on the list, especially Frans',
> we got a great momentum to get a new level of HIG.
>
> I would like to discuss some of the requirements the future HIG should
> meet.
>
> 1. The HIG must be usable for the developers. This is crucial. If the
> guidelines are not "read" and not followed, we have failed. Therefore
> they must be relevant, easy to use, applicable and accessible. Usability
> is about making things fitting users' needs. And as a usability
> principle, you should not project your own opinions into others. So we
> should put some effort in fitting the guidelines to the developers'
> needs. I will describe later today some ideas how this can be achieved
> (and thus fetch many of the issues discussed in this list so far).
>
> 2. The HIG must be connected and cross referenced to the other
> guidelines. In fact, usability and e.g. accessibility are often touching
> similar issues. This is partially a technical issue (how to cross link),
> but also something which requires constant communication between both
> groups. The worst case it that the guidelines conflict or contradict to
> each other. I want to assure that this does not happen.
>
> 3. As Frans pointed out, the HIG must serve also for external developers
> (and companies).

I think it is hard to find someone who doesn't think so. The tricky part is 
what it practically means, and how we will tailor our document to it. For 
example, according to quotes from Kenneth on kde-artists from the CIG(which I 
have a vague idea of what it is), it deals with how to select icon themes, 
and that's only relevant for a small group of KDE developers in rare 
occasions; The CIG is then not focused on 3rd parties and the common cases 
KDE applications will need.
What do you think practically will steer the content of the documents(for 
example in that aspect)? In one of the mails I suggested having a small 
"meta-HIG", document -- what do you think of that? Don't hesitate to go into 
details.

I brought up many points in those letters where most are unanswered; whether 
starting a new subdomain is a good idea, if it's good to separate 
accessibility/usability guidelines, if to use XSD, etc. etc. I may be wrong, 
but I would appreciate if that was pointed out, and the rationalis to the 
current plans are outlined(which surely would solve misunderstanding, if any, 
from my side). Feel free to followup in depth to those letters.

> And it is a sign to the world that usability (and 
> accessibility) is taken serious at KDE. This is very important. Also,
> companies and public administration migrating to Linux on desktop must
> consider ergonomics and norms (ISO, DIN). If KDE does not meet them (in
> the future), it will be more difficult to conquer the desktops of this
> world. The norms are not that much magic, they are mainly strange
> formulations of usability (and accessibility) principles. However, I
> would like to make sure that the HIG conforms to these norms.

Great, I have no experience with open source & usability combined with 
traditional usability related standards; but with the traditional, 
patriarchal standards bodies concerning quality control combined with open 
source. I hope it's not the same.. :)


			Frans

_______________________________________________
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]