[Soc-2013-dev] Weekly report #4 UI Replay

[David Jeske]

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Vincent Akkermans <vincent at ack-err.net>
 wrote:

> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Ack-err/GSoC_2013/Toolbar_Evaluation
>
> Because that evaluation report is quite lengthy I'll be short here.
> Comments and thoughts are most welcome.
>

IMO, the biggest opportunity for improvement is that the report ordering is
upside-down. This report should be written as "a. What should we do? THIS!"
-> "b. Background on why? This is why." .. It would be nice to read your
thoughts and conclusions without reading lengthy terms and observations
about software packages (some/all) of us already know.

I recommend starting with "what is the toolbar used for" "goals for the
toolbar" and "key opportunities and comparisons" (from the review of
tools). This way we will immediately know what your goal is, and what
tangible thoughts and recommendations you have so far. Only after that you
can append Background and Glossary.

1) Who is the audience for the report? What is the purpose of the report?
State it up front.

2) I don't see the clear orthogonality you imply exists between
"object-based" and "tool-based".

3) In "modifier stacks" you twice use the word "application" as if
applications are either 100% or 0% modifier stacks. I recommend changing
this to "parts of applications" or "modes of interaction"

4) I think many of the opening "definitions" sections would make more sense
if put in the context of "goals of the toolbar", rather than listing
abstract toolbar characteristics

5) I'm no expert on Apple Motion, but your description of the
object-properties system there sounds more like Blender
property-sidebar-transform and Blender properties-editortype
object-transform and modifiers -- than the Blender Toolbar/Operator panel.
The net-result is that I don't follow your observation about how Motion's
property system leads to fewer tools -- or how it might apply to blender.

6) The narrative description of Modo's choice to use "edit and confirm"
semantics for operators, and your trouble with them, are a bit unnecessary
except maybe in a rarely read appendix.

7) "scrolling is evil" is not a factual or appropriate statement in a
report like this. You mean something like "scrolling creates challenges".
However, your next words are flawed because we can not talk about
challenges of scrolling without talking about an alternative solution to
the problems it addresses.


hope that helps..
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/soc-2013-dev/attachments/20130712/b9d6f24a/attachment-0001.htm