|
|
| Re: inline insertion [message #28313 is a reply to message #28119] |
Fri, 02 February 2007 07:06  |
 danny foncke
Messages: 92
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
I think you have a point to some extend, certainly worth considering
Our problem is that we have a lot of small chunks of reusable content.
If we don't inline we have too many links and after a few clicks the
user doesn't know from where he's coming nor where he's going
Our content is re-arranged depending on 'angle' and user-category. Some
content returns in different pages but is only likely to be seen once by
a specific user-category. This content is sometimes only a paragraph, we
don't really want them to click away from the page.
Maybe we could use 'in-place' viewing, where the info is presented as a
link, but when clicking it, it opens some sort of frame inside the same
page ?
And maybe make that 'version aware' - when a new publication is done and
the actual content of the snippet has changed the in-place frame is
'open' by default, if nothing changed, it's a link .... - OK, I'm
getting way ahead of myself again :)
I'm not a usability expert, any advice is welcome.
Rob Robason wrote:
> I guess I'm not opposed to it exactly, but I probably wouldn't use it. The
> reason is that repetition breeds contempt when reading documentation. When I
> encounter a link to information that I recognize having already read, I know
> I don't need to read that again. If it's inlined, then that disappears and I
> have to read it all again. Even if I recognize it and want to skip it, it
> would be difficult to decide how far down to skip to resume new material.
>
> Just seems like a bad practice.
>
> Rob
>
> "danny" <danny.foncke@smals-mvm.be> wrote in message
> news:eppfm0$4cb$1@utils.eclipse.org...
>> We (think we) need inline insertion to have more and better re-use of
>> pieces of information and avoid copy-paste.
>> This is essentially about the re-use of information in the content
>> packages
>> We would like to have a 'copy-link'. This could be for example a check-box
>> in the 'link' dialog (when using the rich text editor).
>> The net result being that the publication step when encountering this
>> checked option will inline the information in stead of providing a
>> traditional link.
>>
>> I don't think this is possible now. We are thinking of developing this.
>>
>> Has anybody any ideas how we can do that (best), or why we shouldn't ?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Danny
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: inline insertion [message #575745 is a reply to message #28119] |
Fri, 02 February 2007 07:06 |
danny foncke
Messages: 92
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
I think you have a point to some extend, certainly worth considering
Our problem is that we have a lot of small chunks of reusable content.
If we don't inline we have too many links and after a few clicks the
user doesn't know from where he's coming nor where he's going
Our content is re-arranged depending on 'angle' and user-category. Some
content returns in different pages but is only likely to be seen once by
a specific user-category. This content is sometimes only a paragraph, we
don't really want them to click away from the page.
Maybe we could use 'in-place' viewing, where the info is presented as a
link, but when clicking it, it opens some sort of frame inside the same
page ?
And maybe make that 'version aware' - when a new publication is done and
the actual content of the snippet has changed the in-place frame is
'open' by default, if nothing changed, it's a link .... - OK, I'm
getting way ahead of myself again :)
I'm not a usability expert, any advice is welcome.
Rob Robason wrote:
> I guess I'm not opposed to it exactly, but I probably wouldn't use it. The
> reason is that repetition breeds contempt when reading documentation. When I
> encounter a link to information that I recognize having already read, I know
> I don't need to read that again. If it's inlined, then that disappears and I
> have to read it all again. Even if I recognize it and want to skip it, it
> would be difficult to decide how far down to skip to resume new material.
>
> Just seems like a bad practice.
>
> Rob
>
> "danny" <danny.foncke@smals-mvm.be> wrote in message
> news:eppfm0$4cb$1@utils.eclipse.org...
>> We (think we) need inline insertion to have more and better re-use of
>> pieces of information and avoid copy-paste.
>> This is essentially about the re-use of information in the content
>> packages
>> We would like to have a 'copy-link'. This could be for example a check-box
>> in the 'link' dialog (when using the rich text editor).
>> The net result being that the publication step when encountering this
>> checked option will inline the information in stead of providing a
>> traditional link.
>>
>> I don't think this is possible now. We are thinking of developing this.
>>
>> Has anybody any ideas how we can do that (best), or why we shouldn't ?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Danny
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03169 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
