Infusion Builder Rev 2 design - feedback needed

Jonathan Hung jhung at ocad.ca
Mon Jan 31 21:42:52 UTC 2011


Hi everyone,

Thanks to those of you who took the time to respond with their feedback!
After some informal user testing and based on your comments, I've made some
modifications to the way exclusions and dependencies were being handled.

If a user excluded component A, and then selected component B, it's possible
that component A would become selected again (because A is a dependent of B)
even though it was expressly excluded. This interaction gets more
complicated as more items are chosen for download as multiple excluded items
can become included again.

To help alleviate this confusion, the user's action of excluding an item is
now completely separate from the dependency selection process through the
introduction of an "Ignore this item" function. This way the user can
express their desire to exclude an item from the download package by
activating the "Ignore" option, and be confident that their preference will
remain throughout their interaction.

Attached is an illustration of how this would work. The diagram shows what
would happen if the user had selected Inline Edit, Progress, and Reorderer,
and excluded Infusion Framework Core, jQuery, and the JSON parser from the
download package.

Other changes to the design include changes to wording and adjustments to
the layout.


Please take a look at the image and let me know your thoughts.

- Jonathan.

---
Jonathan Hung / jhung at ocad.ca <jhung.utoronto at gmail.com>
IDRC - Interaction Designer / Researcher
Tel: (416) 977-6000 x3959
Fax: (416) 977-9844



On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Cheetham, Anastasia <acheetham at ocad.ca>wrote:

>
> Jon,
>
> I like how you've provided the feedback that a de-selected module is
> required in two placed: both near the module in question and near the
> download button.
>
> It might be helpful for users to understand the implications of going ahead
> with the download anyways. Perhaps near the download button, an extra phrase
> or two? something like "If you proceed with this download, you may be
> missing some functionality. If you expect to be able to provide it yourself
> (e.g. if you already have a copy of jQuery), then you should be ok."
>
> Separate thought: The warning on the de-selected module says "Required by
> current selection." I wonder if it would be a) helpful and b) feasible to
> actually specify which parts of the current selection require it. For
> example, next to the JSON parser module, it could say "Required by
> Reorderer." This might be quite helpful, but it also might be verbose in
> some cases, and it wouldn't be entirely straightforward to implement.
>
> --
> Anastasia Cheetham     Inclusive Design Research Centre
> acheetham at ocad.ca            Inclusive Design Institute
>                                        OCAD University
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://fluidproject.org/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20110131/840df7fc/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Builder-rev2-with-Ignore.png
Type: image/png
Size: 94291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://fluidproject.org/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20110131/840df7fc/attachment.png>


More information about the fluid-work mailing list