[Sugar-devel] buddy tags

[Eben Eliason]

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
> Hi Eben,
>
> On 4 Aug 2009, at 02:19, Eben Eliason wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2 Aug 2009, at 15:00, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Gary (and others),
>>>>
>>>> what was decided about buddy tagging?
>>>
>>> No one else has commented yet :-(
>>
>> I had a brief conversation with Christian about this recently. He said
>> he'd try to catch up on the thread and maybe give a few comments.
>
> Fab, that would be great!
>
>>>> Were you interested in working on it?
>>>
>>> Yes, I've just added some new mock-ups (keeping them as simple/achievable
>>> as
>>> possible), so maybe someone else can take a look at them and provide some
>>> feedback:
>>>
>>>       http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Proposals/Buddy_Tags
>>
>> I think the settings panel looks like a good start. I wonder if we
>> should stick with "tags" here, or if it would be worth calling this a
>> "description" or "things I like" or something similar.
>
> Yea, I was playing safe with the input box name. I wanted to avoid
> suggesting folks type in a natural language sentence or paragraph. If we had
> tokenised text field support, life here would be easier (and else where we
> want folks to use tags) ;-)
>
>  http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Human_Interface_Guidelines/The_Sugar_Interface#Tokenized_Text_Fields
>
>> The palette, on the other hand, doesn't work as you've mocked it up.
>> The primary palette is a fixed height, and only supports single line
>> primary and secondary titles. I think the tags/description belong in
>> the secondary palette instead. See
>> [http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Designs/Activity_Management#03]
>> for a related sketch. We've abandoned the gray background, and we
>> don't have avatars or structured content as shown here, but I think we
>> could add a "section" to the secondary palette containing this extra
>> info. It would expand, but the primary palette would always be a fixed
>> size.
>
> Thanks. I didn't know that. I will amend my mock-ups, should work just as
> well with that change.
>
>> It might also be nice to have the ability to have a button in one's
>> own palette that links directly to the "about me" section of settings
>> to change the info. This will also improve discoverability. The
>> ability to open the settings to a specific section (and even anchored
>> subsection, perhaps) is something we've wanted to expose in many
>> places. It might be a nice task for someone looking for a nice
>> self-contained feature to build.
>
> On the fence about this one, I find one's own palette is getting a little to
> long already (My Settings, Logout, Restart, Shutdown, Register).

Ugh! "Register" really needs to be dealt with; the fact that it ever
entered this menu is frustrating, and it is another long-standing
temporary hack that never got fixed. The intended solution for this
particluar feature is to represent school servers in the neighborhood;
The "Register" action is supposed to be performed on the server, not
on "you".

Isn't "My settings" just "About me" in disguise? Maybe we should just
change that string. There's no need to have the same button appear
twice in the palette. I suppose there's no ridding of 'Logout",
"Restart", and "Shutdown". =)

> Hmmm, random thought. Should clicking on your buddy icon open "My Settings"
> as the default operation? Right now it's just a pretty picture with a
> palette hanging off it. That way you'd just click your buddy icon and pick
> "About Me", avoiding all those nasty techie strings.

That's an interesting idea, though if the button is in the palette,
that might be enough. I might instead suggest as a global rule that
clicking on a buddy should reveal the (full) palette by default.

Eben


>>> Though I'm not sure I have the stamina to get past your code reviews for
>>> any
>>> original coding. It's hard enough to get a bug fix r+ accepted when
>>> making a
>>> minimal tweak to existing code! ;-)
>>>
>>>> From the last Sugar releases tags are broadcasted along the rest of
>>>> the buddy info when using gabble. Was it decided that we also needed
>>>> tags in Salut for 0.86? Or it could come in a later stage?
>>>
>>>
>>> Not knowing the amount of work involved I can't really make a call. My
>>> last
>>> comment is best I can make:
>>>
>>> "Well ejabberd was definitely the first to have solved as it represents a
>>> solution for a more dispersed community, less likely to know about the
>>> others. But having both [gabble + salut] would obviously be much more
>>> consistent.– If you told me 'journal grid view' won't happen, or tool bar
>>> 'stop' always visible won't happen, or 'ad-hoc wirless networks' won't
>>> happen, or 'tags under Journal titles' won't happen, or 'Metacity
>>> layering
>>> issue will persist',– then I'd say let salut slip to 0.88."
>>
>> I agree. I think I'd sooner have basic buddy self-tagging working in
>> both scenarios than have tagging of others (pseudo groups) in one or
>> the other, though.
>
> +1
>
>>> I was also hoping to get some feedback on the first boot experience if
>>> anyone has a strong opinion:
>>>
>>> "I really do like the simple 'first' boot experience, pick colours, enter
>>> name, and your are done! Great! What do folks think about exposing an
>>> optional self tag prompt at this point? Wording is going to be tough, and
>>> would likely need some prompting example tags. As a challenge, feel free
>>> to
>>> reply with some single word tag lists you might assign to yourself..."
>>
>> I'm not sure it's necessary to do this. the more streamlined this
>> process is (and the less description/guidance needed) the better. I
>> think that adding this info could be part of a first day lesson, if
>> it's something that instructors wanted to emphasize.
>
> +1 agreed, I just wanted to be sure we weren't missing a trick here.
>
> Regards,
> --Gary
>
>