Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame
From: delire (delire_AT_selectparks.net)
Date: Fri Jul 27 2001 - 19:12:10 EEST
----- Original Message -----
From: "Taybin Rutkin" <trutkin_AT_physics.clarku.edu>
To: <linux-audio-dev_AT_music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Friday, 27 July 2001 10:51
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe that studies have been done with dynamic menus. They found
that
> > > it was confusing to have the menus rearrange. Humans get used to
looking
> > > for the same thing in one place, and if the place changes and we have
to
> > > look for it, it is an annoying slowdown.
> > >
> >
> > Don't rearrange the existing menu just have a "best of menu" in the
> > menu.
>
'best of menu' or a 'dynamic learning menu' *is a [constant] rearrangement*
in the sense of cognition - as a menu is at best a reliable form of
transport. get a working system up based on exisiting successful menus's in
projects of a similar scale - the effort of innovation can be spent in
better places !!
a mnemonic menu need only carry a five 'recent files / applications' for
instance.
'learning menu's' are useful up until the point they become reliant on
monkish consistencies. when the needs of the studio change they become
stubborn. the principle of the 'shortest route' can be invested in where the
design of menu's is concerned because it recognises that menus should be as
transparent as possible [where 'opacity' might be the friction of hampered
interaction].
this is all very idealistic of course ; )
de|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 27 2001 - 19:15:24 EEST