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

List:       mozilla-ui
Subject:    Re: Default UI
From:       Marshall <marshall () pssnet ! com>
Date:       2000-01-28 23:45:52
[Download RAW message or body]

> > > Can someone clarify the function of the controls in the location bar?
> > > Specifically, the down arrow (standalone) and down arrow (with bounding
> > > box). I assume one of those is equivalent to "Go" button?
> > 
> > Nope.  They are the arrows for drop down boxes which aren't in there
> > yet.  The search button is going to have a drop down box as well, so its
> > possible that a go button might go in there - but no one knows for sure
> > do-di-do-do do-di-do-do ;)
> 
> So multiple dropdowns for the same entry field? I assume one is for History.
> What's the other & are the different graphic styles intentional? This seems
> very awkward to me.

They aren't in the same entry field.  The first one drops down under the
location bar to give you the history (You are correct on this)  The 2nd
one, the Search one, is a button.  I'm guessing, the dropdown will
modify the operation of that button to preform an action.  For example
in it you will probably see the options:

Search
Go

If you selecto Go the caption of the button will change to go - and it
will operate like the go button in IE.  Right now the search button is
functional.  You select a default search engine in the preferences (They
use the Mac Sherlock files ... so you can add your own) then if you type
words in the location bar and press search, a search for those keywords
will be started.

> > > Why are these buttons/controls inside what appears and acts like a common
> > > text entry field?
> > 
> > See above.
> 
> Yes, but why are they "inside" the entry field? Does this not seem clunky to
> anyone else? My guess is that adding in an additional "Go" button to the mix
> will just complicate this for the end user.

Probably to make it look cool (yeah yeah the cool factor again).  It
could also be that the text box doesn't have a border yet (Its just
modifying some CSS files... stuff like that will be modified in later
releases.  Personally I think that the colour coding is enough, although
the arrows could get a border when you mouse over them so you can at
least tell they are buttons.  I'm sure it will be refined though.

> > > Can 2 (or more) toolbars exist side-by-side in an uncollapsed state?
> > Not with this skin.
> Too bad. This would be a nice feature that would allow you to have multiple
> functional toolbars and still take up minimal space.

I didn't say it wasn't possible.  Its just not possible with THIS skin
at this time.  Who knows what will happen in the coming months (Although
I wouldn't expect much to change as a lot of the functionality for this
skin can already be seen on the netscape page).

> > > Why do the navigation toolbar buttons extend beyond the blue bounding box,
> > 
> > If you mean that gray bar below the buttons which looks really bad...
> > well thats the design.  see http://home.netscape.com <- Its the same as
> > the skin.
> 
> No, the Netscape site does not overlap the icons and bacground color
> boundaries. This simply looks like a mistake in the browser and should be
> changed IMHO.

Its probably just a XUL or CSS thing.  The buttons are probably
valign=center so without the caption (See the netscape page), they
overlap a little.  This also helps them debug the opacity command in the
short term as disabled buttons are the same as enabled buttons with the
opacity turned down.

> Good. Unless the icons are completely intuitive, it's a very good idea to
> include accompanying text. The Netscape site does this by putting the text
> in the gray area below. It's difficult to tell how this will be accomplished
> in the default browser skin with the current design.

I'm sure thats why the gray bar is there in the first place - well that
and it looks nice with the little rounded corner on the other side :)

> Speaking of the gray areas, I assume this (and the rounded corners) were
> done for purely aesthetic reasons? Right now, it appears that this just
> occupies valuable screen space and has no other purpose. For example, look
> how much space the throbber occupies.

I would say its purly aesthetic.

> > > Are there other default navigation bar buttons besides the current 4 that
> > > are planned?
> > Nope.  They want to use a minimal interface.  These are the only buttons
> > you need.

> These are the only 4 buttons that WHO needs? 

The avg user.  I know I never use the security button.  I hit the
printer button by accident (I never actually want to use it.)  Home,
search, shop, and my netscape are now in (or going to go in) either the
personal toolbar or built into the location bar.
What you are left with are the 4 navigation controls beside the
navigation bar in a nice, logical group.

> Does anyone know if any user research was done to determine what 4 buttons users \
> want/need? Has this been validated?

I personally don't know of any tests, but just watching people use the
browsers where I work, I'd say Back, Stop, and Reload get the most
action (Forward is there to match the back button - used less than the
other ones IMO)

> > > If/when security can be added, will there also be a "security"
> > > button like 4.x versions? If not in Mozilla, what about Netscape?
> > 
> > I'm sure there will be a lock in the corner and probably a pulldown menu
> > to access this information.
> 
> Anyone have any pointers to who might be working on this?

Well on www.mozilla.org there was a little notice about what will be
happening now that the US relaxed its security laws.  Check out the
notices there.

> > > If users can add navigation buttons, will there be a limit to how many
> > > buttons can be added? What happens if they try to add more than allowed?
> > 
> > Nope.  Its just like scripting an HTML file.  And it uses javascript.
> > Its VERY flexable.
> 
> Yes, but if a user adds 10 buttons and the browser window can only display 7
> (example: vga user on 15" monitor), how will the user know there are
> additional icons? Will the toolbar scroll? Will the icons wrap? I'm just
> trying to understand how this might work.

However the skin designer has it setup.  Right now the only way of
adding buttons is to modify the xul files directly.  I'm sure some sort
of toolbar customization utility will be created before the initial
release or very soon after.  Right now, if you squish the window, the
buttons just dissapear.  Although you could have it setup to scroll (It
might look a little ugly).  One of the old skins had the buttons wrap,
so thats possible too.  Its just like writing an HTML (Its a different
language... very similar format though)

> > > Will the personal toolbar support mini icons similiar to 4.x versions of
> > > communicator?
> > 
> > Probably... depends on what the artists do.
> 
> I'm more interested in whether the architecture will support this than the
> graphics.

The buttons are just text and images, so whatever you can do with
javascript and style sheets, you can do on the toolbar.  Make them 1
pixel buttons or whatever, it doesn't matter.

> It's probably safe to assume that many users will simply not want to mess
> with skins and will use the default UI as their daily browser. 

I'd say its safe to assume that too.  Although if changing skins is
really easy, you might see more people doing it.  The browser will come
with at least 2 skins.  Probably one that is more like a "default"
interface than the netscape blue one.  Afterall CSS2 can read all of the
system colours and font settings, so we'll see what happens.

Right now there is 1 skin because when a change is made its just easier
to modify 1 thing.  As XUL settles down, I'm sure we'll see more and
more skins (Probably after the beta)

> The default UI will be the one that the user first sees and as we all know, first
> impressions are VERY IMPORTANT. Alternative skins would be great, but the
> default UI needs to be well thought out, designed right, and be easy to use

I agree with everything you say there.

BTW Ignore Jerry... he's always like that :P  Getting Netscape to change
their interface is hard.  Even employees of netscape have a hard time
doing it :|  But this is mozilla, and once XUL is settled we will be
able to introduce other interfaces.


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