Le dimanche 17 juillet 2005 à 18:59 -0400, Alan Cox a écrit : > On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 12:50:41AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > So what ? They're still closer by an order of magnitude to classical > > text apps than to a GUI in the Gnome sense. > > You need to understand why. If you look at UI research you will see that there > are two distinct kinds of interface at work here. The first is one which you > are highly familiar with (eg the checkout). Prompts, guidelines and help are > buried away in case you forget a detail so that performance is maximised. You > carry the 'conceptual map' in your head. > > The other that GUI's more normally reflect is casual use devices. You don't > remember the precise operation but instead the menus and icons on screen guide > you by prompting memories or links with previous experiences or related things > that are not immediately conciously present. > > A trained operator can happily look up tickets for flights by typing something > like "LHR>>>YYZ>>>S#" because they do it every day. Its a very different > interface design goal Thank you for the explanation. I do understand it. That's why I wrote the difference was not between technical and non-technical tasks but between repetitive and non-repetitive (but your message will be better received than mine I'm sure) And an awful lot of people that use computers for work not to chat/play/discover casually their tool fall in the repetitive category. They're not a technical elite minority. It's a mistake to design an interface that purposefully ignores their needs. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
