[IAEP] http://www-testing.sugarlabs.org/

[Christian Marc Schmidt]

Thank you, everyone, for your feedback on the test site. The goal remains to
get the site launched very soon‹we¹ll work on a revised build will that will
attempt to address the main concerns raised today.

Best,


Christian


On 2/27/09 2:55 PM, "Carol Farlow Lerche" <cafl at msbit.com> wrote:

> I second Michael's suggestion about a web design that echoes the Sugar
> design.  Think how useful this would be if carried to school servers.  And as
> a basis for web-served Sugar-like activities.
> 
> I have to agree with the conclusion that the test design is off-putting.  It
> is certainly not intelligible to children.  One of the foundations of the
> Sugar interface is to make things iconic and simple and universal.  The flood
> of words, most of them jargon, just doesn't work.
> 
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Michael Stone <michael.r.stone at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:56:52AM -0500, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
>>> >David Farning wrote:
>>>> >> Sorry there was a typo in my last email the site is actually
>>>> >> http://www-testing.sugarlabs.org/
>>> >
>>> >I forcefully object to everything about this website.  It is ugly,
>>> >off-putting, unnavigable, unreadable, buggy, empty of any helpful
>>> >information, and in many other ways among the worst websites I could
>>> >possibly imagine for this purpose.  It is a very cool javascript tech
>>> >demo, which is not at all useful here.
>>> >
>>> >Meanwhile, the front page of the wiki is beautiful.  It presents the
>>> >visitor immediately with a statement explaining what Sugar is, and a bunch
>>> >of clearly named links to learn more about Sugar and Sugar Labs.
>>> >Scrolling down presents a wealth of introductory information about Sugar,
>>> >presented in a logical fashion.  It does all of this in a
>>> >non-headache-inducing color scheme, using complete sentences.  Clearly a
>>> >lot of work has been put into this, and it shows.
>> 
>> Christian,
>> 
>> I wish I felt differently, but I agree with pretty much everything Ben said.
>> In
>> fact, I found myself so put off by the new design that I left the site after
>> reading no more than two entries. I was particularly frustrated by the
>> meaningless colors, the dark -> light background transition, the useless
>> sound
>> bytes, and the invisible one-word menu that overlaps other text when I
>> scroll.
>> 
>> In more detail, this is not the Sugar design that I enjoy -- in Sugar:
>> 
>>    * Colors denote individual identity and contribution; they aren't uniform
>>      over a page and they aren't randomly regenerated on each visit.
>> 
>>    * Contrast is used carefully: I would never see a black menu with yellow
>> text
>>      over a pure white background, nor a yellow menu with white text on a
>> white
>>      background. (Both of which I observed.)
>> 
>>    * Text colors are never reversed for emphasis.
>> 
>>    * Views are scoped and zoomable, and information is usually arranged in
>>      visually pleasing layouts with gray-out filters or search; not organized
>>      hierarchically.
>> 
>>      (The exception is toolbars, which Eben redesigned in a fashion much more
>>      consistent with Sugar's design imperatives:
>> 
>>         http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Designs/Toolbars
>> 
>>      )
>> 
>>      (At any rate, contrast the hierarchy-free Neighborhood View and the Home
>>      View with semi-hierarchical Journal or the (deeply hierarchical) source
>>      code layout.)
>> 
>>    * For better and for worse, icons are used everywhere in place of short
>> text.
>>      Short text is presented only on hover.
>> 
>> Now, as an alternate suggestion: why not use the desire for a nicer website
>> as an opportunity to test out our actual underlying UI design principles?
>> 
>> For example, I'd love to see a Sugar front-page that used the Frame and its
>> zoomable Views for navigation, perhaps organizing hierarchical content with
>> Eben's Toolbar design.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Michael
>> 
>> P.S. - Just think of the educational opportunity that's slipping away by not
>> dogfooding the existing design work. :)
>> _______________________________________________
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
> 
> 

-- 

Christian Marc Schmidt

schmidt at pentagram.com

Pentagram Design, Inc.
204 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10010
212/ 802 0248

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20090227/a4fb9cab/attachment-0001.htm