Quote from: doze at Jun 25, 2009, 05:35 PM
Quote from: BobRay at Jun 25, 2009, 05:16 PM
"if you have the Manager configured for tabs, do this, if configured for panels, do this."
I don’t think that it would matter very much in this case from documentation point of view.. the content in both is the same. In other option the content is just rendered in separate tabs and in the other in separate panels..
But the documentation should be done in any case with the default look of the manager.. these settings are just for "experienced" users that probably don’t have to look every thing from a screen shot. I for example like the panels because they are draggable and I’d like that those layout settings would eventually save to db so that I could layout all the various views like I want. And for me, I would take that feature over any documentation. But I also understand the users who like to have good docs and screen shots on how to go about in the manager, but like said, these docs should be done with the default manager layout.
And for reference, Revolution and it’s concepts have been compared to Eclipse many times.. Eclipse also allows users to customize the layouts of the UI (a lot more than what Revolution does currently) and they have still managed to provide documentation for it.
I wouldn’t limit the manager functionality based on the point that it would be more work to document. But that’s just my opinion.. what ever the head honchos decide, that’s ok for me. 
Good points. My main hope is that things like this get settled soon (and permanently) so I don’t have to keep rewriting.
I wonder if there would be a significant speed penalty if MODx has to check the system setting for this option before rendering each new panel or tab and process if statements as it renders. It might also create some code maintenance headaches (especially as new browser versions are introduced).
-
☆ A M B ☆
- 24,524 Posts
For what my opinion is worth, I feel that it would be a serious mistake to try to be all things to all people. We’ve seen over and over again bloated apps that try to do just that, and end up becoming victims of their own complexity.
As I understood from the beginning, Revo was designed in such a way as to make the entire manager much easier to modify, customize and even completely replace. It seems to me it would be far better to go with one design, and then have others available later as drop-in replacements for those who wish other layouts or formats.
Quote from: sottwell at Jun 26, 2009, 12:29 AMIt seems to me it would be far better to go with one design, and then have others available later as drop-in replacements for those who wish other layouts or formats.
Yes.. this would be good.
"He can have a lollipop any time he wants to. That's what it means to be a programmer."
Quote from: sottwell at Jun 26, 2009, 12:29 AM
For what my opinion is worth, I feel that it would be a serious mistake to try to be all things to all people. We’ve seen over and over again bloated apps that try to do just that, and end up becoming victims of their own complexity.
As I understood from the beginning, Revo was designed in such a way as to make the entire manager much easier to modify, customize and even completely replace. It seems to me it would be far better to go with one design, and then have others available later as drop-in replacements for those who wish other layouts or formats.
My sentiments exactly.
Plus, there are things I’d much rather have the core developers spending their time on than fixing problems in multiple Manager interfaces with every new browser release.
I like tabs, but I can also understand the idea behind panels.
If we can only have one, panels, but if both are making the cut, I say tabs for default.
I'm learning more about MODx all the time and loving it.
Tabs, tabs, tabs!
My experience is that users prefer tabs to delineate content regions, rather than scrolling. But an option to toggle between the two would be fine.
In latest SVN (and the upcoming beta-2), the layout can now be toggled between tabs (default) and portal panels via the setting ’manager_use_tabs’.
shaun mccormick | bigcommerce mgr of software engineering, former modx co-architect |
github |
splittingred.com
Quote from: BobRay at Jun 26, 2009, 12:16 AM
Good points. My main hope is that things like this get settled soon (and permanently) so I don’t have to keep rewriting.
I wonder if there would be a significant speed penalty if MODx has to check the system setting for this option before rendering each new panel or tab and process if statements as it renders. It might also create some code maintenance headaches (especially as new browser versions are introduced).
Tabs +1.
I can only talk for evo, but setting up a choice between tabs and panels is not that much work. I also can’t see any maintenance headaches lurking in the depths, so perhaps this will be the way thing will turn out for evo too...
Regards,
pepebe
I definately agree with tabs. Panels to me seem a little more congested than most would like. Its easier to see something laid out in plain sight at the top of the active pane than to have to scroll down to find the other options. In my opinion this would be much better for overall work flow. Since the goal 90% of the time is to be able to produce the content or the sight as quickly as possible, with as little mistakes as possible. I think that a configuration setting is also a good idea because it adds overall more versatility. I know from a developers perspective that it will make documentation a pain, but the overall question is this: "What is best for the user?"
