[Plone-UI] Dexterity UX notes from Emerald Sprint

[Alice UXAccount]

oops forgive the double reply, forgot to reply all.

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Alice UXAccount <atseng.ux at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Dylan,
>
> Thanks for your thoughts and feedback.
>
> We should be thinking about the future where TTW developers outnumber
>> file-system developers 2-3 times.
>> As such we need to be careful about relying on surveys of existing
>> developers. We are very different people that those that I train to use
>> diazo and dexterity TTW.
>>
>
> This is an interesting point -- would you segment the "TTW Developer" as a
> unique group or would you see them as sharing similar goals as "webmaster /
> integrator" ?
>
> I think that it will be useful to survey a few groups just to get a better
> understanding of potential audiences, but to clarify, these surveys
> wouldn't be used as a narrow directive in anyway (and certainly not to skew
> the interface into an audience group that currently doesn't use the tool at
> the cost of another).
>
> As with most of these techniques they aim to facilitate a wider discussion
> and to provide a more holistic approach at looking at the problem space.
> Indeed, I would suspect that "TTW Developers" think about things
> differently than "File System Developers" ... but in which ways and how ...
> I think surveying could get us some useful information.
>
> For example, we could survey existing file-system developers for the types
> of tools they currently use in their workflow for rapid prototyping and
> communicating with non-developers and get some insights into which type of
> features and tools they find valuable and which they don't.
>
> This type of survey may indeed prove that the TTW editor has no potential
> for this specific audience but it may uncover some features that actually
> are a good fit; at the very least it would provide useful information for
> framework developers on what this audience is already using/has unmet needs
> in (for rapid prototyping/communication) that may benefit the overall
> framework.
>
>
>> One way around this is we could have a new kind of behaviours. A field
>> set. It's like a behaviour in that you can reuse it amoung many content
>> types. The difference is it only does one thing, and thats and a single
>> block of fields to a certain location in the schema. So it's a reusable
>> mini schema. They could be editable via the web, and once you edit them,
>> the changes are reflected in any content type that uses that fieldset.
>> Plone could come preinstalled with many fieldsets such as "dates"
>> "contributors" "events" etc.
>>
>
> This notion of some type of "common presets" was a theme I saw come up
> several times during the Sprint - some folks mentioned the 80% most common
> cases, others use the language of 'templates" -- but there seems to be some
> convergence on the idea that some common behaviors or fields could be
> pre-bundled and re-usable to save users' time/effort.
>
> An interesting ah-ha when the group was brainstorming is the issue that
> having saved re-usable bundles would mean that the user should be able to
> select which ones are active. Then, everyone realized that this would be a
> useful feature now -- even without presets -- currently the moment you
> create a content type it's automatically activated in the site.
>
>
>> We're prepared to try and involve some of our customers who we're
>> encouraging to use dexterity in this kind of testing.  That isn't many
>> people because you can't really do much with TTW dexterity right now
>> (unlike diazo).
>>
>
> That would be great and very helpful. You don't need a ton of users - in
> fact every user you observe and get feedback from adds to the collective
> understanding of the problems and solutions. Let me know if you need any
> resources to facilitate that.
>
> Cheers,
> Alice
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-ui/attachments/20130219/9d959abd/attachment-0001.html>