activity configuration UI

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Wednesday 28 March 2012 17:54:46 Ivan Čukić wrote:

> Honestly, I don't see anything amusing there. If a designer asks for
> something, that turns out not to be technically feasible, the techies
> say 'no, not possible'.

I have to admit that, while not actually making me laugh, your statement 
sounded a bit strange to me as well. The reason is that you didn't include 
"that turns out not to be technically feasible" in your original statement. 
You wrote "We definitely need some place where UX people like Fanya and Thomas 
(and others) would write one sentence per issue and we would write why
it can not be like that.". Of course you meant that you (the developers) would 
only write that in case it actually isn't feasible. But taken by itself, this 
statement reads like "Whenever UX people write something, the developers 
always say that (and why) it can not be like that.

> IF you say 'I want the password entry in the activity switcher', I say
> 'no, not possible. would diminish security ...', or 'ok, sounds good,
> lets do it'.
> 
> As simple as that.

Sure. We just want our ideas to be seriously considered and the feasibility be 
seriously evaluated before they are possibly rejected due to infeasibility, 
that's all. I don't mean to imply that you are currently not doing that. It's 
just that we can only accept what you say, without being able to verify if 
there really is no way to do something. Therefore we're in kind of a weak 
position.

> > decisions have been taken and what technical backgrounds led to this
> > decision. That would have saved us nearly the whole thread :)
> 
> Totally agree :)

+1 It makes sense in general to post summaries of agreements that were reached 
via "private" communication to the mailing list so that everyone who is on the 
list is informed.

> > So please be kind to us aliens, also known as designers.
> 
> I might have sounded unkind, and I do apologize if I did, it wasn't
> the point. Just wanted to be as short as possible :)

Okay, let me explain in a little more detail what I'm experiencing (sorry, 
nothing short here ;) ):
Generally when designers and developers meet, the developer is in the stronger 
position. A developer can create code without a UI design. Depending on the UX 
skills of the developer, it may or may not be very usable or visually 
pleasing, but it runs. As a designer, however, can't create anything working 
on my own. I *need* a developer to implement my design.
If I have created an excellent design but can't find a developer willing to 
implement it, I've lost.
In the business world, depending on the company structure, I may have the the 
right to force a developer to implement a design, no matter what he thinks or 
how he feels about it. In the F/OSS world, this is not possible. Here I have 
to not only convince, but also motivate the developer to implement my design.
And sometimes, when something has very high priority for us from a UX 
standpoint but it does not have high enough priority for any developer, it 
just doesn't get done. This is just the way things are and no one can be 
blamed for it, but nevertheless it can be frustrating at times.

The situation of tight cooperation between designers and developers in Plasma 
Active as a community project is a very good thing and it is why I like the 
project so much, but it's new to us and probably new to most or all of you as 
well. Therefore it's a learning experience for all of us and sometimes it 
doesn't hurt to remind each other that we're all in this together.

So, no offense, keep up the good work and let's all be friends :)

Cheers,
Thomas