On Sep 1, 2009, at 2:28 PM, Guillaume Lerouge wrote: +1 but only provided we agree on the default colors. Right now I'm -1 with the current colors. I've had several negative feedbacks about them (too light).

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 14:29, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote: +1 -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

The skin is still the provisory skin isn't it ? I would prefer to wait for the nice version being programmed. I think the provisory version has no real advantage on the old one. It is the same information architecture (worst indeed) with only the minimalist layout as a plus. Imo the minimalist layout is made to work with the exellent ergonomics from first Caty versions. This is what makes it emotionaly coherent. So I would prefer to wait the skin being developed.

I would propose : 1 - Start from the nice proposition 2 - Work on the menu UX design, wich was the discussion point. (use "advanced" button ?) 3 - Develop it... 4 - relase Colibri skin So unless I missed something and the colibri skin is not still in his old provisory state, it will be -1 for my part. 2009/9/1 Th omas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Ho that's it. It is a design decision based about scrolling. I forgot this point. So I understand now. Yet I still have some remarks about this because what you choose now is not neutral at all. I don't say it is good or bad. I say everybody have to understand the implications. /***************************** Disclaimer : All of this is mainly theorical, UX is not an exact science when you can't make tests. Also I can be biaised by my own eperience (I'm definitivly not a newbee user, more probably a geek user). The only manner to really be sure about it is, like usual, to make tests on a few real newbee users... *****************************/ Situation : Just imagine you are in a supermarket and you search for butter. First of all you assume butter is somewhere in the food aera. Then you may think that butter is with all prooducts based on milk. Also it should be in a freezer aera. So you will find easily the butter. Information architecture and ergonomy use a lot a methode called "card sorting" to create such logic aeras. They write the elements of the interface on paper. Then they ask people to group card they think to be linked. Then they make stats on groups to define an architecture of elements grouped in a logic way. More information : French : http://www.ergolab.net/articles/tri-cartes-ergonomie-web.php English : http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/card_sorting_a_definitive_guide You understand, I think, what I mean. In a "logic aeras" way the edit button and all what is related specifically to the content on the page should be near the page. (I dont mind it is moving or not, since it is in the content aera) Ok. Now, you will say me that anyone found a solution to get at the same time the content related links near the content and at the same time having the content related links always accessible. So : "the menu becomes inaccessible once you scroll down". This is right. So they're is a deal... Will I choose something : * Efficient ? Quicly accessible user bar. * Newbee friendly ? Put the information where they will search it. It really depends on the targeted users : * If users know the should be an edit button somewhere, choose something effcient. * If users will use the wiki all the days choose something efficient. / * If firms have a problematic of adoption and at the same time a lot of people not skilled in computers choose something newbee friendly. * If yo want anybody can contribute quicly, even if not at ease with computers choose something newbee friendly. For my part, not knowing who are the personas, I would have choosen the version where the content related actions are in the content aera because : * Imo and according to what I read, scrolling back to someting he has already noticed is not the greatest problem for casual users. * A newbee oriented design avoid getting people lost since a regular users design only deserve regular users confort. Yet I guess the main clients xwiki are people who have to use regulary the tool or people who know that they here to edit page and that it can be done cliking on an "edit" button somewhere on the page. So... Imo this decision is not about a blind vote in a mailing list where evryone is biaised by the fact he know the tool. This decision is to : * Have its implications evaluated. Best by tests, else by brainstorming like we are doing. * Being linked with political and marketing orientations. Project leader, marketing personas, community... I don't know who.... 2009/9/1 Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> Thibaut DEVERAUX wrote: