28 Mar
2011
28 Mar
'11
4:27 p.m.
Hi Supreet
Great to see you took the time to work on this.
My remarks below
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Supreet Pal Singh <supreetpal(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu
<sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
After giving it quite some thought here's my take on the Mobile Skin
proposals:
# I believe that keeping a static bar of functions/tabs on top would be more
convenient than the one at bottom due to the fact that it would lead to a
lot of clutter and presence of a lot of active buttons in a small amount of
space.
Here ( http://www.x.supreetpalsingh.com ) ,If we have a look at the image
on the right where I have tried to demonstrate as to how the edit page would
look on the skin suggested by Jerome with functions at the bottom of the
page, we can clearly see that the bottom of the page is filled with a lot of
active links/buttons making it less user friendly and inconvenient to use. (
Inconvenience may not be obvious but the clutter can easily be observed )
You are mixing stuff here. My proposal is about a "view page" mode. So
the bottom bar is all you get, there is no such "save", "info" add
pictures etc. in the proposal I make.
I think it's important at this point to well differentiate the "view"
and "edit" UIs. In my view, the edit UI should be modal, just as it is
on the "desktop skin". This translate by no other button than
"preview", "save" and "cancel". Yes, the rest disappear, no
search
bar, no lower toolbar with "delete" or "infos" buttons (those are
actions related to the page and accessible when in "view" mode).
Add picture could stay, but that's different, that's a component of
the edit UI (same as we have "insert image" when editing a page with
the WYSIWYG).
So there is no such clutter at the bottom of the UI, since there is
just the "toolbar" (even though I'm not a fan of this name, "action
bar" is probably better) in view mode ; and the "buttons bar"
("save",
"view", "cancel") in edit mode.
On 03/23/2011 02:27 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
away
An interesting article I read recently summarizes how the iphone, ipad
and desktop versions of the top websites differ in transfer size, DOM
size, and number of HTTP requests.
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/03/14/mobile-comparison-of-top-11/
The results are a bit mindblowing. These sites go to great lengths to
offer the best performance on mobile devices (for example storing static
portions of the HTML page in Local Storage to save on transfer), so
making a mobile version of a site could involve a lot more changes than
just shuffling things around with a bit of more CSS. For best results, a
whole new skin should be written (meaning lots of .vm templates).
The problem with this approach is that it will duplicate code, making it
harder to change things in the templates.
Hey, that was a very nice article :) Hopefully we ll also be able to
optimise XWiki very effectively for mobile devices. Also, I need some help
as to how I can about start writing the project code to develop the skin
from scratch.
Hi Supreet,
Great to see your interest in this project.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Supreet Pal Singh<supreetpal(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hey Caty,
> Thanx :)
> Also,I went through those links and the sketches heres what I think:
>
> 1. Jerome's version does look better and simple but I feel it would lack
the
> ease of use as most of the functions would be
present in a separate menu
> which could be reached through the '+' . More clicks leads to a less
> intuitive UI and downgrades user experience. On the other hand, Jerome's
> version gives a lighter and better look with only the main functions on
the
> homescreen. What needs to be looked into is
whether the main options are
> sufficient to cater an average user such that we can ignore the 'more
> clicks' aspect.
> What I have also noticed is that Jerome's version does include all the
> functions present on yours yet has an option '+' and even your version
has
> an empty function box so I am guessing there
are/would be more functions
> that need to be present or added.
> Personally, I am in favor of your version of the skin because its
functions
> serve as tabs for dynamic lower portion of
the screen, the static layer
of
links to
the various functions/screens makes it easy to navigate for the
user.
Couple of remarks :
* It's maybe not obvious, but in my sketch the lower bar is static, so
you don't have to scroll for it, it always remains at the bottom of
the user screen
* As I tried to explain in my comment, I tend to think base use case
of a mobile version is about searching + reading content and comment +
annotations. I think edit is a marginal use case. Does not mean it
should not be doable, but IMHO it should not be considered a primary
action. OTOH a good and accessible search is a must have. That's why
in my version the search bar is first class citizen, at the top of the
page.
* The search would be a dynamic one, a bit in the spirit of the search
suggest available since XE 3.0 (best is to check the feature in the
version in 3.0 RC1, due today)
>
> 2. Even I feel that the two scrolls on the comments page should be done > with instead it should take the whole page.
>
>
> And I am new to XWiki and its development tools so I would be needing
your
> help to get on track so please bare with my
newbie questions.
> 1. I have downloaded 'xwiki-enterprise-installer-generic-3.0' and would
be
following
the instructions as given on
http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/DevGuide/Skins , is this the
correct approach?
Yes it's an approach that would work.
Also I think the mobile skin is about dropping tons of stuff, so
another approach would be to create a new skin from scratch and build
it keeping only on what is essential (to have good performances). > 2. What else can I do to get a better know
how and integrate myself more
in
the
project?
An idea could be you spend some time investigating how other wikis
have designed there mobile version (wikimedia one is interesting, but
I'm sure there are others) and refine on the design proposals Caty and
I made with your own ones, what do you think ?
# Also two static bars (Search<top> and
Functions<bottom>) will not be very
useful as it would consume a lot of space and leave relatively less space
for the main content of the page which can be displayed without scrolling.
For me the search bar should not be static. It's at the top so that
it's easily accessible when you first display a page, since it's
something you often want to reach for immediately (scenario : I open
my wiki, I search for a page, I read it, I comment it, etc.). But when
you start reading the page, it's not so important to have it available
on the screen.
# The design proposal by Caty is according to me
better but there can be a
few changes to improve user experience.
For Example , on the same link above if we observe the image on the left I
have done away with big XWiki logo which was present earlier with the tabs
instead inserted a thin horizontal title bar above them. This leads to two
things:
1. Increased space per tab which is very useful since we are targeting a
'touchscreen' audience and the larger the tab the more user friendly it is .
2. If we decide to maintain the previous the size of the tabs we get room to
accommodate one more tab/ function.
The action bar buttons don't have to be big. They need to be big
enough so that you can touch them easily even with big fingers, but
that's about it. In my opinion you can 8 without problem.
Jerome
What do you think?
'-
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thanx,
Supreet
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs