[kde-guidelines] Phrasing of selection teasers

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On 05.09.2013 11:25, Diego Moya wrote:
> On 4 September 2013 20:54, Thomas Pfeiffer <colomar at autistici.org
> <mailto:colomar at autistici.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 04.09.2013 13:44, Diego Moya wrote:
>     Do you have any data supporting that users are indeed confused?
>     I haven't done any usability tests on the classic dual-list pattern yet,
>     but with one full list and one empty list, I don't see how users
>     would think they should interact with the empty list first.
>
> Not hard data, but anecdotal evidence watching users struggle with the
> flow to add and remove items, and being confused as to which list of
> elements if the one being used. Some of the confusion may be dependent
> on the actual application design, but the dual design definitely
> requires some time to learn.
>
> As for interacting with the empty list - finding an interface
> "intuitive" depends on subtle visual cues more than on rational analysis
> (no shit, Sherlock). In the dual list design proposed by the guideline
> [1] both lists have the same visual design, which makes them symmetric
> and therefore intuitively have the same weight; one has to actually
> 'think' about which one to use (oh, the lists on the right is empty, I
> have to start with the other one); there is no confusion, but you have
> taxed the user attention a little bit.
>
> If you provide an asymmetric design instead, giving more weight to the
> thing that users have to interact with first, the first impression
> already directs attention to the [Avaliable items] list without needing
> any conscious thought. The Five Second Test [2] is a good way to measure
> whether users will find the basic structure of a design intuitive and
> can make sense of it without much effort; you might want to give it a
> try to compare the various design alternatives.

Yes, an asymmetric design could make sense here.

> On 4 September 2013 20:40, Heiko Tietze <heiko.tietze at user-prompt.com
> <mailto:heiko.tietze at user-prompt.com>> wrote:
>
>     Your discussion is a nice example of the advantage of Personas:
>     either he or
>     she wants to have a very efficient tool (reduce the number of
>     clicks) or prefer
>     learnability.
>
> I agree, Personas make it easier to find out when it's better to
> recommend separate interfaces for different use cases, and when it is
> possible to include a one-size-fits-all widget.
>
>
> However, building good Personas for an open source project is a daunting
> task. I see that there's an initiative to build Personas for KDE4 [3],
> can you tell me what's its overall state?
>
> [3] http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/Principles/KDE4_Personas

It currently lies pretty much dormant. I've tried to revive it during 
this year's Akademy, but doe to time constraints on my side noting has 
come out of that effort yet. It's still on my agenda, though, as I think 
it's a very important project.
If you'd like to help, that would be greatly appreciated, of course :)