Season of Usability project

[C. Boemann]

On Monday 15 August 2011 10:59:56 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Friday 12 August 2011 Aug, C. Boemann wrote:
> > On Friday 12 August 2011 15:02:46 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > > On Friday 12 August 2011 Aug, C. Boemann wrote:
> > > > On Friday 12 August 2011 10:52:56 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 11 August 2011 Aug, Cyrille Berger Skott wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > We have been offered the possibility of a season of usability
> > > > > > project (season.openusability.org), which would be mentored by
> > > > > > Celeste.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > We are not lacking of interesting usability problems. So the
> > > > > > question would be what do you think should be our priority for
> > > > > > this ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well... While we still have a lot of work to actually fix the
> > > > > usability issues that the previous seasons identified, I think
> > > > > that we could reap benefits if we move away from the usual "let's
> > > > > identify 3 big issues in Words when compared to Microsoft Word"
> > > > > 
> > > > > My suggestion would be, based on Inge's mail:
> > > > > 
> > > > > * devise a complete interaction design for setting default values
> > > > > for shapes.
> > > > 
> > > > If we add to that moving the accompaning dockers to a tool (default
> > > > tool?) then I think we have a good project. But we need a dev that
> > > > can assist
> > > 
> > > I'd say that that would best be a separate project, since it's pretty
> > > huge to figure out that correctly.
> > 
> > Hmm, in that case we better do the moving project first as i see default
> > values highly depending on where and how the values are editied.
> > Actually i'd say these topics are inter dependent, so if you think it's
> > too huge then maybe we should look for another project
> 
> I'm kind of lost right now :-). Do we actually already have a wiki page or
> something where the next steps for the dockers gui are listed? I didn't
> realize that the plan was to tie all shape property dockers to tools as
> tool option widgets -- or am I wrong and isn't that what you suggested?
well you yourself suggested such a possibility and i think it ould make sense 
but in this case all i'm saying is that we should see things as a whole

> 
> For the default values, I was thinking of just the add shapes docker, where
> it should be possible to add/remove default shapes and to edit the
> properties of the shapes that are in that docker.
ok if this is the limit then i don't see any problem with such a project 
description