QR in current SVN

Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here.
Forum rules
Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here. Feature requests are closed.
Roberdin
Registered User
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:44 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by Roberdin » Thu Jul 30, 2009 5:39 pm

Like in your other topic, we all understand perfectly what you are trying to say. We simply disagree with your interpretation. That doesn't mean the team's argument is "flawed".
Rob

stevemaury
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:44 am

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by stevemaury » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:08 pm

Your electrical supply analogy is flawed. The better analogy to the way QR is enabled would be that your mains are on, but all the circuit breakers are off. Unless one has access to the service panel, the power is disabled.

bolverk
I've been banned
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by bolverk » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:51 pm

Roberdin wrote:Like in your other topic, we all understand perfectly what you are trying to say. We simply disagree with your interpretation. That doesn't mean the team's argument is "flawed".
*sigh* :roll:
bolverk wrote:Spilled milk anyway, it's already been cleaned up. ;)
http://code.phpbb.com/repositories/revision/phpbb/9878
;)

User avatar
Acyd Burn
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 5:18 pm
Location: Behind You
Contact:

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by Acyd Burn » Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:13 am

It is not "cleaned up" - this was a mistake i will revert (global setting will be ON - local setting OFF, which results in OFF)

Image

bolverk
I've been banned
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by bolverk » Fri Jul 31, 2009 12:29 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol:
bolverk wrote::lol: So QR is and will be enabled by default when released. The individual forum setting being defaulted to 'No' is not the same as saying the feature is disabled by default. Thanks for clearing that up. :P
Allow quick reply:
This setting defines if quick reply is enabled or not. If this setting is enabled, forums need to have their quick reply option enabled too.
Just as an aside, and I am not telling you to set it either way just pointing out what prompted the question in the first place, you are looking at this with boolean logic from a coding perspective but what you seem to missing is that your users look at it from a natural language (i.e. User Interface) perspective. It is either enabled or disabled, the default being yes or no. :)
feature_enable_disable.jpg
(74.03 KiB) Downloaded 1693 times
Acyd Burn wrote:It is enabled globally to circumvent support requests of the like: "hey, i enabled it in the forums, why does it not show up?! YUO!!!"
That really would not be an issue if it was implemented differently. Think Jabber, if not enabled globally the notification method option for Jabber only is grayed out, as it should be. IMO, if a global setting is off any more granular setting that depends on it should really not be user selectable until the global feature is enabled. :)

User avatar
Acyd Burn
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 5:18 pm
Location: Behind You
Contact:

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by Acyd Burn » Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:03 pm

There our opinions differ.

Image

Roberdin
Registered User
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:44 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by Roberdin » Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:05 pm

Allow quick reply:
This setting defines if quick reply is enabled or not. If this setting is enabled, forums need to have their quick reply option enabled too.
Who says that this language string is final? (Maybe it is, I don't know, but it's only in the SVN so far, right?)
bolverk wrote:Just as an aside, and I am not telling you to set it either way just pointing out what prompted the question in the first place, you are looking at this with boolean logic from a coding perspective but what you seem to missing is that your users look at it from a natural language (i.e. User Interface) perspective. It is either enabled or disabled, the default being yes or no.
I suspect that there will be many users who do not come across the "global setting" for a while after they start setting up forums (and might hence be confused were it disabled), many users who agree with your perspective and many other users who would not. :)

Ah, it seems that Acyd Burn has got there before me (and more succinctly).
Rob

bolverk
I've been banned
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by bolverk » Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:26 pm

Acyd Burn wrote:There our opinions differ.
In respect to what?

a)You don't think the difference is because you look at it from a coding perspective and I look at it from a user perspective?

or

b)The fact that lower level switches dependent upon a global setting should not be selectable in the UI if they are not active at the global level?

bolverk
I've been banned
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by bolverk » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:49 pm

Roberdin wrote:I suspect that there will be many users who do not come across the "global setting" for a while after they start setting up forums (and might hence be confused were it disabled),
Which is where consistent UI design comes in, features that are not enabled board wide that have dependencies or switches at a lower level should reflect the status, i.e. be grayed out or not displayed at all. I.e. Similar to how enabling of board wide emails is the dependency for the account activation method of 'By user' or 'By Admin' to be available. Consistency is really the point and the key to good UI design, be it the ACP UI or any end user UI. :)
Roberdin wrote:many users who agree with your perspective and many other users who would not. :)
I agree. What I would then ask you is how many phpBB board administrators do you think have a development background in terms of coding logic versus how many are just regular people who wanted to add a forum application to their website and take the UI at face value, using the natural language employed there? What percentage of each would you guess it to be? Based on the last 7-8 months in the support forum viewing exactly the types of questions that tell you where the users are having difficulty using the ACP interface I would say it is likely ~90%/10% average user/coder mix. Also gives me my first idea for a "mod" that I wouldn't mind actually releasing as it would be useful to others that struggle with the complexity of the current ACP UI. "Extreme Makeover, ACP Edition" :D

I have to check out how that whole MOD's in development process works. Inline help would fit nicely in such a MOD now that I think about it.

Roberdin
Registered User
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:44 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

Re: QR in current SVN

Post by Roberdin » Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:56 am

bolverk wrote:Which is where consistent UI design comes in, features that are not enabled board wide that have dependencies or switches at a lower level should reflect the status, i.e. be grayed out or not displayed at all.
I don't believe that is helpful at all. If a setting is greyed-out or simply not there, it does not explain to me why that is the case; no more than if it has no effect. Now you may argue (perhaps correctly) that some reference should be made to the global setting at the local configuration level to avoid such confusion; but of course, no confusion arises at all to an administrator who has not yet discovered the global setting in the present configuration, since he has not had the opportunity to disable it globally yet.
bolverk wrote:What I would then ask you is how many phpBB board administrators do you think have a development background in terms of coding logic versus how many are just regular people who wanted to add a forum application to their website and take the UI at face value, using the natural language employed there?
I make no contention that phpBB administrators fall into groups like that; indeed, my point remains that many administrators may be developers who share your perspective (or do not); and many may be administrators with no experience in any programming, scientific, or logic field who do not (or do) agree with you. It simply depends on how one's mind looks at the problem. Similarly, I don't believe that there is a ubiquitous "natural language" shared by all non-developers in looking at this. The language strings explaining the ACP settings could definitely be less ambiguous in places, but they also have the simultaneous burden of being concise and remaining equivalent across all cultures who speak the language.

For a poorly related example of how difficult it can be to agree on "natural language", in Lancashire, England, the word "while" has the same meaning in the local dialect as "until". Apparently, this led to several near fatalities when the locals, at railway level crossings, mis-understood the sign, "Do not cross while lights show"; thinking it meant, "Do not cross until lights show".
Rob

Post Reply