[Bf-funboard] Re: Toolbox Design 3

[Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero]

t_w_@freenet.de (2003-10-08 at 2150.59 +0200):
> Hi!
> 
> An update to be my Toolbox work:
> 
> http://wrstud.urz.uni-wuppertal.de/~ka0394/en/blender_ui/
> 
> Please give me some feedback!

Design 1: crowded and forcing different scanning procedures. It is
like a pie menu to start, and later worse than normal menus. Reducing
time by less distance is fine, but you lose time cos the things are
crowded and the order looks random at first.

Design 2: it is like pie menus but the previous entry is lost, right?
How do you go back or know where are you? And again, pie menu for
first step, then back to normal but crowded in some cases.

Design 3: crowded, but a bit less too. From where did you got the idea
that a two column list is easy? Or that you have to split things in
two groups?

In all cases: the command line would collide with hotchars function if
it gets added to all menus, and you removed the shortcut feedback.

What I know for sure about menus:

Pie menus are based in navigating by direction, and possibly giving
options to go back. Distance traveled is not important at all.

Normal menus are based in single lists in reading order (left to right
and top to bottom for languages that are read that way), ordered by
similar functions and using separators or blanks to add clarity.

In both cases, they do not mix concepts, which you do. Your idea
sounds like hybrid, and dunno if this one of the cases were hybrid is
good at the end.

So I agree with the other post: where can this be tested beyond
mockups? The images alone do not convince me. I want to test how such
lack of white space or separators works, and how mixing two methods
works.

GSR