--- Log opened Mon Feb 13 00:00:15 2012
11:39 < conseo> mcallan: in your latest mockup of the diff-bridge with xf-toolbar, why is the top track (poll, plan, law...) shown at all on the bridge?
16:33 < mcallan> http://zelea.com/project/votorola/s/gwt/scene/_/mash/diff-1.xht
16:35 < mcallan> conseo: the toolbar and track are the theatre stage.  their structure does not shift with the scenes, such as bridge vs. votespace or whatever
16:36 < mcallan> (so you can still select a different poll and navigate to it, regardless of what scene you're in)
18:33 < mcallan> re votespace track, we could glue the entire stage (toolbar and tracks) to the viewport and let the draft scroll behind it
18:33 < mcallan> conseo: i think i'll mock that up
18:34 < mcallan> (we can't put your photos in a track, but we might be able to squeeze them into the stage corners.  not sure)
21:06 < conseo> mcallan: ping
21:09 < mcallan> conseo: pong
21:09 < conseo> i have uploaded zelea.com:/home/c/DifferenceBridge8s.svg as i didn't want to post it to the list without asking you about your opinion first
21:11 < conseo> play around with the layers and you should get the idea (hopefully, otherwise more homework to do...)
21:11 < conseo> i'll clean up the dishes, be back in 15 mins or so
21:13 < mcallan> ok...
21:21 < mcallan> conseo: you should post, it's interesting!  it's got a lot of pieces tho, so i'm not sure where to comment first...
21:22 < mcallan> maybe eyes are a good idea for the talk track, i never thought of that.  not sure other face details are needed tho
21:23 < mcallan> i still want to know the purpose of the horizontal bridge, and will ask about that in the list.  you say "to attract users".  then i will ask what's the attractor exactly?
21:24 < mcallan> (i thought headshots were the attractor in your mockup, but you've removed them)
21:27 < conseo> yes, maybe there is some better layout where they still fit, but i think votespace (footing) information is more crucial
21:29 < conseo> i also wanted to match the level of information you are showing closely, i have only replaced the poll track, as i don't see how it differs from browser history/bookmarks (?)
21:31 < mcallan> tracks are user choice, so the lesser ones don't matter.  all that matters are the attractor-tracks, like talk track.  maybe put headhots in top corners, right inside the track stack.  they *are* attractors, but hard to fit in
21:34 < conseo> yes, it is really hard to target that little vertical space
21:35 < conseo> mcallan: sry that i haven't had time earlier to talk and finish the harvester stuff, i wanted to finish this mockup first, so we can agree at least on the xf toolbar stuff
21:35 < conseo> although i'd really feel better by convincing you of the horizontal diff bridge
21:40 < mcallan> it's ok, the mockups are top priority.  i'm now back to them again.  i *am* convinced that some people would prefer a horiz diff (never me), but it's a preference issue.  therefore it belongs in production, not alpha or beta
21:40 < mcallan> (we won't have users till we get through alpha)
21:41 < conseo> problem with the bridge is: it is core to all further (larger scale) processes, so we need to get people to use it. the need is there, people i have explained it to agree that the wall of text phenomenon is killing most discussions before any substantial outcome
21:41 < conseo> so my plan is to get people interested in the bridge and explore everything else from there
21:42 < conseo> the bridge is the first thing they see as outsiders, because these are the links all over the place. if they get confused on this page, we can do not gain them back on the others
21:44 < conseo> we can make it a preference, but if we redesign we should cover a common ground. i don't want to code against you.
21:45 < conseo> the advantage of the horizontal layout imo is that you can read the layout in many directions and get an idea of different aspects of the context. it is easier to connect different parts of the layout
21:49 < mcallan> to get users we need 1) usable 2) attractors.  the horiz bridge is *neither*, so it's #3 or later in my priority stack.  but that's just me
21:50 < conseo> ok, but making attraction a thing rather than part of the process is a bit dangerous imo, because you might add "attractors" which make the layout more confusing and less attractive in itself
21:51 < conseo> i think we should skype in the next days
21:51 < conseo> this is the end of my day and i'll post it tomorrow
21:51 < mcallan> ok
21:52 < mcallan> ps - http://zelea.com/project/votorola/_/javadoc/votorola/s/gwt/stage/StageV.html
21:53 < conseo> ok, good. thx
21:53 < mcallan> but bear in mind, individual tracks cannot be dangerous...
21:53 < mcallan> they can always be removed/replaced by user
21:54 < mcallan> as long as overall stage design is good... *that's* the risk
21:55 < conseo> ok
21:55 < conseo> mcallan: i think the "feed track" is the most attractive atm.
21:56 < conseo> mcallan: i should use getBlah() instead of blah() for getters as defined by the java standard, right?
21:56 < mcallan> feed: yes, or it will be when we get the design right.  talk is both attractive, and central to what we do
21:58 < mcallan> getters, it's a matter of style unless you need to be bean compiant for some reason.  if there's noth getter/setter, then i follow bean standard.  otherwise i prefer blah()
21:58 < mcallan> *both*
21:58 < conseo> ok
21:59 < mcallan> so blah(), but not blah() setBlah(); rather getBlah setBlah, or isBlah setBlah
22:00 < conseo> ok
22:13 < mcallan> i made up my mind, no votespace track yet (at least not from me).  the bridge footings are too expensive to recode up front, when there's no need.  we can safely do it later
22:13 < mcallan> conseo: so now i can get back to coding this tool track
22:16 < conseo> ok
22:16 < conseo> i am off to bed now
22:16 < conseo> n8
22:17 < mcallan> n8 c
--- Log closed Tue Feb 14 00:00:31 2012