let's begin with two

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> For me, from a designers perspective, there is the big goal of polishing
the
> current User Interface and its Interaction. This has been not
accomplished
> yet. Just a few things to mention about that:
> - A big goal should be becoming more and more touchfriendly, touch
> centered, offering a real flow while working with the product (for
example
> the add items and cancel buttons in the add resource dialog are too
> desktop-like). We talked a bit about this topic in our last workshop
> - we should now concretize the steps.
> - Switching: the flow of working between activity and apps, switching
and
> opening is not mature yet - there was also a mail about "a lot of elbow"
> movement on the ML as well
> - Shaping and polishing the User Interface and its experience; there are
> little issues like the activity switcher wheel that looks bad with only
> 3 activity thumbnails, because they are too far away from each other; or
> sometimes a wording that is not optimal. For this point I would like to
> invest time in heavy user testing. With PA1 we have a version that users
can
> test, try, sqeeze, adjust.... and we should observe them. I am 100%sure,
> that there are still a lot of traps in the UI, that should be fixed
> - ShareLikeConnect: the current context menu is not final in my opinion.
> It doesnt work consistently for all types of resources (there is "remove
> bookmark" but no "remove/unlink document") and is not intuitively
> understandable.
> 
> So, besides the recommendation feature I would rather use the time to
> polish UI wise. If there is time left we can try to think about a smart
way
> how to implement the image management workflow and adapt its patterns
> to the rest of the system. But thats already a big tasks for 5 weeks
only ;)

Hmmm... looks like there is a priority conflict between usability and
usefulness
here. I agree with you that all the points you mentioned are valid and
need to
be fixed in order to get a polished UX.
On the other hand, I see the the absence of a file organizing mechanism as
a
major drawback for usefulness in many usecases. We have many viewer apps
pre-installed (Image Viewer, Okular, Calligra Active, Bangarang) because,
as
stated on our homepage, "Small ultraportables favor consumption over
creation."
But since all of the above apps are used to view/play files, users will
need to
organize them in order to really get benefit from Plasma Active (or at
least
import them form external media, unless they have everything in the
cloud).

Therefore I think it is okay to not have a system that fully supports the
image 
organizing user story  in PA2 yet, but to me the system feels really
incomplete
if I have to use Konsole in order to get files from an external drive onto
my
device.
Plus, a file organizing mechanism could also help with the problem of new
files
not being indexed because Strigi is suspended since it would have to
handle
addition to the Nepomuk database in order to work anyway.

But that's just my opinion. I think we have two major tasks here (ux
polishing
and file organization) which both need to be done at some point, so we as
a 
team have to decide on priorities for PA2.