Default theme ?

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hello Ryan:
Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I personally
think that front-end website design and implementation is far more
difficult to master then is commonly acknowledged. I applaud your
efforts. At no time was I trying to disparage or dismiss any of the
OFBiz work that you or your colleagues have contributed.

Please see my other comments inline:

Ryan Foster wrote:

> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the initial
> design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from Brainfood's
> public facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a certain amount of
> obligation to defend my position.  Let me first start off by saying
> thank you all very much for this discussion on user interface in
> general and for the feedback on the BizznessTime theme.  I sometimes
> feel like a lone wolf in a sea of developers immensely more talented
> than me when it comes to back-end programming, so I think a small
> amount of front-end discussion is refreshing.  I take a huge amount of
> pride in my work, and I welcome any and all feedback, positive or
> negative, that will allow me to enhance the user experience

IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and
> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and
> testing of respected organizations and individuals in user experience
> and interaction design:
>
Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That was
never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important content
> should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be required, do
> not like to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has been extensive
> research that tends to suggest that this school of thought is
> outdated.  Jacob Nielsen discussed this back in 1997(!).  See the
> following links for support:
Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these specifically,
although I have seen other statistical reports that are all over the map
as far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  All of the content writers
and site designers that I work with insist that best practice is to have
the most compelling information above the fold. These people are in the
trenches day-in and day-out and are not selling a service.  Just another
data point.

> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/ 
>
> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/ 
>
> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/ 
>
> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>
> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is again
> based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies such as
> Target, Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC, MTV, Ruby on
> Rails, etc. use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their sites and
> applications.  Our friends in the community over at Alexander
> Interactive have been cited numerous times for the navigation they
> developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that showing the menu on hover
> rather than on click would be an enhancement, but I also don't think
> that having to click is a bad thing either.  Again, see the following
> resources:
>

It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns" are. Just
because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't mean they work
in terms of site usability. That is not to say that some menu dropdowns
are not useful. I use them often.

I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that of a
company that does all of its business on the Web - like Amazon. Yes,
they use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as being dropdowns and
not obscured by other site elements.

> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site 
>
> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>
> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our audience
> is", I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have developed
> several client branded themes based on the BizznessTime theme, and
> have received very positive feedback.  When our clients are happy, I
> am happy.  You are right that fancier isn't always better, there is
> research suggesting that doesn't matter.  It may not be better, but
> people think that it is:
>

You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You were able
to do that because you know how to modify and change themes. A new user
(one who downloads a nightly build) will not know how to do this. That
is my target audience.
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.

> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf 
>
> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf 
>
> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf 
>
>
> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and again, I
> appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too big. The
> padding in and around the inputs and submit buttons can be dialed back
> a bit.  I am working on a patch right now that incorporates this
> feedback, as well as additional feedback and discoveries from the
> themes we have built based on the original BizznessTime theme.

I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
And again, thanks for your efforts.
Ruth

> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to give
> the community some insight into my thought process and design
> methodologies.  I hope this helps the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan Foster
> HotWax Media
> 801.671.0769
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim:
>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all
>> labor under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in question here.
>>
>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you referring to?
>>
>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order to
>> use OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a theme,
>> then it should be incumbent on the knowledgeable experienced OFBiz
>> user to change themes and not the new user. New users have enough on
>> their plate just learning how the applications work.
>>
>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something without
>> siting references. You insult my intelligence and every other reader
>> on this list by implying that anything concerning recent releases of
>> OFBiz is "easy".
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>> [hidden email]
>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning the
>>> entire set of backend applications - which is really what needs to
>>> be done. The old theme sucks visually - has no spice, doesn't fit
>>> today's look and feel guidelines AT ALL, looks really old - so I'd
>>> say from someone who does this day in and day out - you're WAY off
>>> when it comes to the way that people react to it (be clear, this
>>> does not talk to using it on a day to day basis).  We've been very
>>> successful in building themes off of Bizzness Time - please are
>>> reacting in a really positive way.
>>>
>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime
>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's just a
>>> reorganization of the data that's there to help give it a facelift.  
>>> I'm not talking to users - I'm talking to you and everyone else who
>>> has issues with it.  Fix it ... or go back to the old theme in your
>>> own setup - don't doom the rest of us to have to go apply first
>>> impressions with that really lame setup.
>>>
>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence - we
>>> just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the early
>>> 2000s instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>> --
>>> Tim Ruppert
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> o:801.649.6594
>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>
>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO, we are
>>>> way off the mark. The backend applications where the BiznessTime
>>>> theme has been applied are designed for end-users who may not and
>>>> probably do not have any experience with HTML or CSS. Lets not
>>>> forget who our audience is here.
>>>>
>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not doubt
>>>> that it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more accessible
>>>> theme should be the way to go.  Fancier is not always better.
>>>>
>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user documentation
>>>> covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to try this out and
>>>> post my findings.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ruth
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients because
>>>>> it's WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to everyone's liking /
>>>>> look and feel.  I think it would be a huge mistake to roll it back
>>>>> to the Flat Grey as we have not had any of the same problems once
>>>>> everyone gets over the initial shock of seeing something different.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but it
>>>>> isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the
>>>>> BizznessTime theme, or create one of your own - it's easy to do -
>>>>> this is a much more solid foundation to build on then the old (and
>>>>> looking really old) theme that's been in there since the
>>>>> beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS to make any
>>>>> changes that might not make it so "large"?  It should be pretty
>>>>> easy with this setup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember this is
>>>>> still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd leave this
>>>>> in place and change it to the ugly, ugly in your own installations
>>>>> before I wanted to go back to Flay Grey as a sales tool ....
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer to
>>>>>> zoom out.
>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported, and
>>>>>> those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure though...)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject : create
>>>>>> a subtask at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not sure
>>>>>> it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the size
>>>>>> (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of Flat Grey"
>>>>>> as default
>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size issue,
>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]
>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and actually
>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2
>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is perhaps
>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time
>>>>>>>> as default theme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz
>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>

[Ryan Foster]

Inline...

Ryan Foster
HotWax Media
801.671.0769
[hidden email]




On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hello Ryan:
> Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I personally  
> think that front-end website design and implementation is far more  
> difficult to master then is commonly acknowledged. I applaud your  
> efforts. At no time was I trying to disparage or dismiss any of the  
> OFBiz work that you or your colleagues have contributed.

No offense taken.  Like I said, I was just trying to offer some  
additional insight into the discussion.

>
> Please see my other comments inline:
>
> Ryan Foster wrote:
>> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the initial  
>> design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from Brainfood's  
>> public facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a certain amount  
>> of obligation to defend my position.  Let me first start off by  
>> saying thank you all very much for this discussion on user  
>> interface in general and for the feedback on the BizznessTime  
>> theme.  I sometimes feel like a lone wolf in a sea of developers  
>> immensely more talented than me when it comes to back-end  
>> programming, so I think a small amount of front-end discussion is  
>> refreshing.  I take a huge amount of pride in my work, and I  
>> welcome any and all feedback, positive or negative, that will allow  
>> me to enhance the user experience
> IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
>> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and  
>> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and  
>> testing of respected organizations and individuals in user  
>> experience and interaction design:
>>
> Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That was  
> never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
>> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important  
>> content should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be  
>> required, do not like to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has  
>> been extensive research that tends to suggest that this school of  
>> thought is outdated.  Jacob Nielsen discussed this back in 1997
>> (!).  See the following links for support:
> Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these  
> specifically, although I have seen other statistical reports that  
> are all over the map as far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  All  
> of the content writers and site designers that I work with insist  
> that best practice is to have the most compelling information above  
> the fold. These people are in the trenches day-in and day-out and  
> are not selling a service.  Just another data point.

Yes, important information should near the top of the page, I am not  
disputing this.  What I am saying is "There is no fold", and there  
hasn't been one for quite some time.  This term was ported from  
newspaper print design in an attempt to explain a new medium and  
technology in terms that were familiar to designers entering this new  
media arena.  But the internet is not new anymore, and between Rich  
Media enabled mobile phones, integrated/on demand television, kiosk  
displays, laptops, and 42-inch cinema screen monitors, it is simply  
not relevant to modern web design and development anymore.  Honestly,  
between online websites, news portals, cross-channel aggregation,  
bloggers, and RSS feeds, I am not sure that newspapers even use the  
term "above the fold" anymore!  :)

FYI: Last time I checked, content writing and web design were service  
based businesses.  I am also currently closing out a 15 hour day of  
designing/building websites and writing content for my clients, so I  
think that qualifies me as being in the trenches.

>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/
>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/
>> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/
>> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>>
>> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is  
>> again based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies  
>> such as Target, Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC,  
>> MTV, Ruby on Rails, etc. use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their  
>> sites and applications.  Our friends in the community over at  
>> Alexander Interactive have been cited numerous times for the  
>> navigation they developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that showing  
>> the menu on hover rather than on click would be an enhancement, but  
>> I also don't think that having to click is a bad thing either.  
>> Again, see the following resources:
>>
> It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns" are.  
> Just because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't mean  
> they work in terms of site usability. That is not to say that some  
> menu dropdowns are not useful. I use them often.
>
> I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that of  
> a company that does all of its business on the Web - like Amazon.  
> Yes, they use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as being  
> dropdowns and not obscured by other site elements.

I wouldn't so easily discount the millions of dollars that these sites  
generate just because they have a brick-and-mortar presence.  But that  
is not really the point.  You will never make any progress if you just  
copy someone else's model.

"Don't emulate - innovate. Then test."

Oooh, that sounds kind of catchy. Is it too early to copyright that? ;)

Actually a more appropriate A/B phrase would be:

"Emulate. Innovate. Test."

There we go, that sounds more like a tagline...

>
>> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
>> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
>> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site
>> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>>
>> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our audience  
>> is", I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have developed  
>> several client branded themes based on the BizznessTime theme, and  
>> have received very positive feedback.  When our clients are happy,  
>> I am happy.  You are right that fancier isn't always better, there  
>> is research suggesting that doesn't matter.  It may not be better,  
>> but people think that it is:
>>
> You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You were  
> able to do that because you know how to modify and change themes. A  
> new user (one who downloads a nightly build) will not know how to do  
> this. That is my target audience.

I think that is where our disconnect is.  That might be your target  
audience, but that is generally not mine, my colleague's, or my  
employer's target audience.  The decision maker in an enterprise is  
usually not the person who downloads a nightly build. My focus and  
intent is to design an application that a CEO, CTO, Operations  
Manager, etc. can look at and feel confident that his/her 10, 100,  
1000, etc. employees will be able to comfortably and effectively use  
it, and that it will power a site that his/her (hopefully) millions of  
customers will use and return to consistently.  They are the ones that  
will ultimately drive the support and distribution of OFBiz.

>> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
> Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.
>> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf
>> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf
>> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
>> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf
>>
>> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and again,  
>> I appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too big. The  
>> padding in and around the inputs and submit buttons can be dialed  
>> back a bit.  I am working on a patch right now that incorporates  
>> this feedback, as well as additional feedback and discoveries from  
>> the themes we have built based on the original BizznessTime theme.
> I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
> And again, thanks for your efforts.
> Ruth

Keep it coming Ruth.  I appreciate you taking the time.

>> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to  
>> give the community some insight into my thought process and design  
>> methodologies.  I hope this helps the discussion.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ryan Foster
>> HotWax Media
>> 801.671.0769
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim:
>>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all  
>>> labor under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in question  
>>> here.
>>>
>>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you  
>>> referring to?
>>>
>>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order to  
>>> use OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a theme,  
>>> then it should be incumbent on the knowledgeable experienced OFBiz  
>>> user to change themes and not the new user. New users have enough  
>>> on their plate just learning how the applications work.
>>>
>>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something  
>>> without siting references. You insult my intelligence and every  
>>> other reader on this list by implying that anything concerning  
>>> recent releases of OFBiz is "easy".
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ruth
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website: http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning  
>>>> the entire set of backend applications - which is really what  
>>>> needs to be done. The old theme sucks visually - has no spice,  
>>>> doesn't fit today's look and feel guidelines AT ALL, looks really  
>>>> old - so I'd say from someone who does this day in and day out -  
>>>> you're WAY off when it comes to the way that people react to it  
>>>> (be clear, this does not talk to using it on a day to day  
>>>> basis).  We've been very successful in building themes off of  
>>>> Bizzness Time - please are reacting in a really positive way.
>>>>
>>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime  
>>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's just  
>>>> a reorganization of the data that's there to help give it a  
>>>> facelift.  I'm not talking to users - I'm talking to you and  
>>>> everyone else who has issues with it.  Fix it ... or go back to  
>>>> the old theme in your own setup - don't doom the rest of us to  
>>>> have to go apply first impressions with that really lame setup.
>>>>
>>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence -  
>>>> we just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the  
>>>> early 2000s instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO, we  
>>>>> are way off the mark. The backend applications where the  
>>>>> BiznessTime theme has been applied are designed for end-users  
>>>>> who may not and probably do not have any experience with HTML or  
>>>>> CSS. Lets not forget who our audience is here.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not doubt  
>>>>> that it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more  
>>>>> accessible theme should be the way to go.  Fancier is not always  
>>>>> better.
>>>>>
>>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user  
>>>>> documentation covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to try  
>>>>> this out and post my findings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website: http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients because  
>>>>>> it's WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to everyone's  
>>>>>> liking / look and feel.  I think it would be a huge mistake to  
>>>>>> roll it back to the Flat Grey as we have not had any of the  
>>>>>> same problems once everyone gets over the initial shock of  
>>>>>> seeing something different.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but  
>>>>>> it isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the  
>>>>>> BizznessTime theme, or create one of your own - it's easy to do  
>>>>>> - this is a much more solid foundation to build on then the old  
>>>>>> (and looking really old) theme that's been in there since the  
>>>>>> beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS to make any  
>>>>>> changes that might not make it so "large"?  It should be pretty  
>>>>>> easy with this setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember this  
>>>>>> is still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd leave  
>>>>>> this in place and change it to the ugly, ugly in your own  
>>>>>> installations before I wanted to go back to Flay Grey as a  
>>>>>> sales tool ....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer  
>>>>>>> to zoom out.
>>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported, and  
>>>>>>> those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure though...)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject :  
>>>>>>> create a subtask at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not  
>>>>>>> sure it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the  
>>>>>>> size (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of Flat  
>>>>>>> Grey" as default
>>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size issue,  
>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and actually
>>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2  
>>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is  
>>>>>>>> perhaps better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness  
>>>>>>>>> Time as default theme.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz  
>>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

[Pierre Smits]

Currently the search forms position search fields vertically in the second
column with labels in the first column.
E.g. in SFA-accounts the user can default search on account (party) id and
name.

In my opinion the search bar should have the labels on the first row and
search fields on a second row.
Moreover I would like to have the place included in the search form by
default and a market segment (which isn't available right now).

And by default I would show all accounts (like it is in opportunities.

On the profile of an account opportunities are now in the right segment. I
would like to see it in a seperate segment spreading accros the entire width
of the screen, showing more information, e.g. stage, type, currency, amount,
probalility and next step. Plus the functionality to click through and edit.
Plus the functionality to create a new opportunity from that placeholder.
Plus the functionality to delete an opportunity.

Hopefully this elaborates a bit.

2009/10/14 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>

> Hi Pierre,
>
> Inline...
>
> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>
>> But even there some improvements
>> can be made. E.g. in SFA-accounts the search fields could be spread more
>> horizontally than it is now. And I guess that can be said for more
>> layouts.
>>
>
> Could you explain more this last point, I don't get it
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacquees
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>>
>> 2009/10/12 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>>
>>  Hi,
>>>
>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time as default
>>> theme.
>>>
>>> Do you use it?
>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hi Ryan:

Not that I need to get in the last word...

I like your tag lines! Your design points are valid and, for what it is
worth, are now new data points for my consideration going forward.

I'm all about innovation. My original point was not that innovation,
progress or change for that matter isn't good. My original point - which
got lost in the noise - was that building something and then deploying
that "something"  without thorough testing is not good. In fact, the
consequences of doing that in this very competitive market, could be
disastrous. First impressions whether we like it or not, are lasting.
And when seemingly simple things don't work as one would expect - for
example on the ecommerce web store OOTB - that is not good.

Anyhow, I think we beat this to death. Thanks for the discussion.

Best Regards,
Ruth

Ryan Foster wrote:

> Inline...
>
> Ryan Foster
> HotWax Media
> 801.671.0769
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Hello Ryan:
>> Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I personally
>> think that front-end website design and implementation is far more
>> difficult to master then is commonly acknowledged. I applaud your
>> efforts. At no time was I trying to disparage or dismiss any of the
>> OFBiz work that you or your colleagues have contributed.
>
> No offense taken.  Like I said, I was just trying to offer some
> additional insight into the discussion.
>
>>
>> Please see my other comments inline:
>>
>> Ryan Foster wrote:
>>> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the initial
>>> design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from Brainfood's
>>> public facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a certain amount of
>>> obligation to defend my position.  Let me first start off by saying
>>> thank you all very much for this discussion on user interface in
>>> general and for the feedback on the BizznessTime theme.  I sometimes
>>> feel like a lone wolf in a sea of developers immensely more talented
>>> than me when it comes to back-end programming, so I think a small
>>> amount of front-end discussion is refreshing.  I take a huge amount
>>> of pride in my work, and I welcome any and all feedback, positive or
>>> negative, that will allow me to enhance the user experience
>> IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
>>> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and
>>> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and
>>> testing of respected organizations and individuals in user
>>> experience and interaction design:
>>>
>> Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That was
>> never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
>>> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important
>>> content should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be
>>> required, do not like to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has
>>> been extensive research that tends to suggest that this school of
>>> thought is outdated.  Jacob Nielsen discussed this back in 1997(!).  
>>> See the following links for support:
>> Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these specifically,
>> although I have seen other statistical reports that are all over the
>> map as far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  All of the content
>> writers and site designers that I work with insist that best practice
>> is to have the most compelling information above the fold. These
>> people are in the trenches day-in and day-out and are not selling a
>> service.  Just another data point.
>
> Yes, important information should near the top of the page, I am not
> disputing this.  What I am saying is "There is no fold", and there
> hasn't been one for quite some time.  This term was ported from
> newspaper print design in an attempt to explain a new medium and
> technology in terms that were familiar to designers entering this new
> media arena.  But the internet is not new anymore, and between Rich
> Media enabled mobile phones, integrated/on demand television, kiosk
> displays, laptops, and 42-inch cinema screen monitors, it is simply
> not relevant to modern web design and development anymore.  Honestly,
> between online websites, news portals, cross-channel aggregation,
> bloggers, and RSS feeds, I am not sure that newspapers even use the
> term "above the fold" anymore!  :)
>
> FYI: Last time I checked, content writing and web design were service
> based businesses.  I am also currently closing out a 15 hour day of
> designing/building websites and writing content for my clients, so I
> think that qualifies me as being in the trenches.
>
>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/ 
>>>
>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/ 
>>>
>>> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/ 
>>>
>>> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>>>
>>> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is
>>> again based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies
>>> such as Target, Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC,
>>> MTV, Ruby on Rails, etc. use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their
>>> sites and applications.  Our friends in the community over at
>>> Alexander Interactive have been cited numerous times for the
>>> navigation they developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that showing
>>> the menu on hover rather than on click would be an enhancement, but
>>> I also don't think that having to click is a bad thing either.  
>>> Again, see the following resources:
>>>
>> It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns" are.
>> Just because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't mean
>> they work in terms of site usability. That is not to say that some
>> menu dropdowns are not useful. I use them often.
>>
>> I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that of a
>> company that does all of its business on the Web - like Amazon. Yes,
>> they use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as being dropdowns
>> and not obscured by other site elements.
>
> I wouldn't so easily discount the millions of dollars that these sites
> generate just because they have a brick-and-mortar presence.  But that
> is not really the point.  You will never make any progress if you just
> copy someone else's model.
>
> "Don't emulate - innovate. Then test."
>
> Oooh, that sounds kind of catchy. Is it too early to copyright that? ;)
>
> Actually a more appropriate A/B phrase would be:
>
> "Emulate. Innovate. Test."
>
> There we go, that sounds more like a tagline...
>
>>
>>> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
>>> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
>>> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site 
>>>
>>> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>>>
>>> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our audience
>>> is", I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have developed
>>> several client branded themes based on the BizznessTime theme, and
>>> have received very positive feedback.  When our clients are happy, I
>>> am happy.  You are right that fancier isn't always better, there is
>>> research suggesting that doesn't matter.  It may not be better, but
>>> people think that it is:
>>>
>> You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You were
>> able to do that because you know how to modify and change themes. A
>> new user (one who downloads a nightly build) will not know how to do
>> this. That is my target audience.
>
> I think that is where our disconnect is.  That might be your target
> audience, but that is generally not mine, my colleague's, or my
> employer's target audience.  The decision maker in an enterprise is
> usually not the person who downloads a nightly build. My focus and
> intent is to design an application that a CEO, CTO, Operations
> Manager, etc. can look at and feel confident that his/her 10, 100,
> 1000, etc. employees will be able to comfortably and effectively use
> it, and that it will power a site that his/her (hopefully) millions of
> customers will use and return to consistently.  They are the ones that
> will ultimately drive the support and distribution of OFBiz.
>
>>> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
>> Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.
>>> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf 
>>>
>>> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf 
>>>
>>> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
>>> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf 
>>>
>>>
>>> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and again, I
>>> appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too big. The
>>> padding in and around the inputs and submit buttons can be dialed
>>> back a bit.  I am working on a patch right now that incorporates
>>> this feedback, as well as additional feedback and discoveries from
>>> the themes we have built based on the original BizznessTime theme.
>> I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
>> And again, thanks for your efforts.
>> Ruth
>
> Keep it coming Ruth.  I appreciate you taking the time.
>
>>> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to
>>> give the community some insight into my thought process and design
>>> methodologies.  I hope this helps the discussion.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Ryan Foster
>>> HotWax Media
>>> 801.671.0769
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Tim:
>>>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all
>>>> labor under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in question
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you
>>>> referring to?
>>>>
>>>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order to
>>>> use OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a theme,
>>>> then it should be incumbent on the knowledgeable experienced OFBiz
>>>> user to change themes and not the new user. New users have enough
>>>> on their plate just learning how the applications work.
>>>>
>>>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something
>>>> without siting references. You insult my intelligence and every
>>>> other reader on this list by implying that anything concerning
>>>> recent releases of OFBiz is "easy".
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ruth
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning the
>>>>> entire set of backend applications - which is really what needs to
>>>>> be done. The old theme sucks visually - has no spice, doesn't fit
>>>>> today's look and feel guidelines AT ALL, looks really old - so I'd
>>>>> say from someone who does this day in and day out - you're WAY off
>>>>> when it comes to the way that people react to it (be clear, this
>>>>> does not talk to using it on a day to day basis).  We've been very
>>>>> successful in building themes off of Bizzness Time - please are
>>>>> reacting in a really positive way.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime
>>>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's just a
>>>>> reorganization of the data that's there to help give it a
>>>>> facelift.  I'm not talking to users - I'm talking to you and
>>>>> everyone else who has issues with it.  Fix it ... or go back to
>>>>> the old theme in your own setup - don't doom the rest of us to
>>>>> have to go apply first impressions with that really lame setup.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence - we
>>>>> just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the early
>>>>> 2000s instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO, we
>>>>>> are way off the mark. The backend applications where the
>>>>>> BiznessTime theme has been applied are designed for end-users who
>>>>>> may not and probably do not have any experience with HTML or CSS.
>>>>>> Lets not forget who our audience is here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not doubt
>>>>>> that it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more accessible
>>>>>> theme should be the way to go.  Fancier is not always better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user documentation
>>>>>> covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to try this out and
>>>>>> post my findings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients because
>>>>>>> it's WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to everyone's liking /
>>>>>>> look and feel.  I think it would be a huge mistake to roll it
>>>>>>> back to the Flat Grey as we have not had any of the same
>>>>>>> problems once everyone gets over the initial shock of seeing
>>>>>>> something different.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but it
>>>>>>> isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the
>>>>>>> BizznessTime theme, or create one of your own - it's easy to do
>>>>>>> - this is a much more solid foundation to build on then the old
>>>>>>> (and looking really old) theme that's been in there since the
>>>>>>> beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS to make any
>>>>>>> changes that might not make it so "large"?  It should be pretty
>>>>>>> easy with this setup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember this
>>>>>>> is still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd leave
>>>>>>> this in place and change it to the ugly, ugly in your own
>>>>>>> installations before I wanted to go back to Flay Grey as a sales
>>>>>>> tool ....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer to
>>>>>>>> zoom out.
>>>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported, and
>>>>>>>> those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure though...)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject :
>>>>>>>> create a subtask at
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not
>>>>>>>> sure it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the
>>>>>>>> size (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of Flat
>>>>>>>> Grey" as default
>>>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size issue,
>>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and actually
>>>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2
>>>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is
>>>>>>>>> perhaps better.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time
>>>>>>>>>> as default theme.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz
>>>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Ruth,

To make it clear, Ryan did no work on the eCommerce side.
The 3 products by line, etc. are not his work (I'm not quite sure but I think it's Bruno's)
Ryan worked on the ERP side, on the site and on the wiki (design consistencey).
he initial design has been done by Erik Schuessler from Brainfood. Then Ryan (and HWM team at large) did the implementation.
No such effort has ever been made for the eCommerce. I already explained why, at least why I think it like that...

Jacques

From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]>

> Hi Ryan:
>
> Not that I need to get in the last word...
>
> I like your tag lines! Your design points are valid and, for what it is
> worth, are now new data points for my consideration going forward.
>
> I'm all about innovation. My original point was not that innovation,
> progress or change for that matter isn't good. My original point - which
> got lost in the noise - was that building something and then deploying
> that "something"  without thorough testing is not good. In fact, the
> consequences of doing that in this very competitive market, could be
> disastrous. First impressions whether we like it or not, are lasting.
> And when seemingly simple things don't work as one would expect - for
> example on the ecommerce web store OOTB - that is not good.
>
> Anyhow, I think we beat this to death. Thanks for the discussion.
>
> Best Regards,
> Ruth
>
> Ryan Foster wrote:
>> Inline...
>>
>> Ryan Foster
>> HotWax Media
>> 801.671.0769
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Ryan:
>>> Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I personally
>>> think that front-end website design and implementation is far more
>>> difficult to master then is commonly acknowledged. I applaud your
>>> efforts. At no time was I trying to disparage or dismiss any of the
>>> OFBiz work that you or your colleagues have contributed.
>>
>> No offense taken.  Like I said, I was just trying to offer some
>> additional insight into the discussion.
>>
>>>
>>> Please see my other comments inline:
>>>
>>> Ryan Foster wrote:
>>>> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the initial
>>>> design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from Brainfood's
>>>> public facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a certain amount of
>>>> obligation to defend my position.  Let me first start off by saying
>>>> thank you all very much for this discussion on user interface in
>>>> general and for the feedback on the BizznessTime theme.  I sometimes
>>>> feel like a lone wolf in a sea of developers immensely more talented
>>>> than me when it comes to back-end programming, so I think a small
>>>> amount of front-end discussion is refreshing.  I take a huge amount
>>>> of pride in my work, and I welcome any and all feedback, positive or
>>>> negative, that will allow me to enhance the user experience
>>> IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
>>>> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and
>>>> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and
>>>> testing of respected organizations and individuals in user
>>>> experience and interaction design:
>>>>
>>> Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That was
>>> never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
>>>> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important
>>>> content should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be
>>>> required, do not like to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has
>>>> been extensive research that tends to suggest that this school of
>>>> thought is outdated.  Jacob Nielsen discussed this back in 1997(!).  
>>>> See the following links for support:
>>> Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these specifically,
>>> although I have seen other statistical reports that are all over the
>>> map as far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  All of the content
>>> writers and site designers that I work with insist that best practice
>>> is to have the most compelling information above the fold. These
>>> people are in the trenches day-in and day-out and are not selling a
>>> service.  Just another data point.
>>
>> Yes, important information should near the top of the page, I am not
>> disputing this.  What I am saying is "There is no fold", and there
>> hasn't been one for quite some time.  This term was ported from
>> newspaper print design in an attempt to explain a new medium and
>> technology in terms that were familiar to designers entering this new
>> media arena.  But the internet is not new anymore, and between Rich
>> Media enabled mobile phones, integrated/on demand television, kiosk
>> displays, laptops, and 42-inch cinema screen monitors, it is simply
>> not relevant to modern web design and development anymore.  Honestly,
>> between online websites, news portals, cross-channel aggregation,
>> bloggers, and RSS feeds, I am not sure that newspapers even use the
>> term "above the fold" anymore!  :)
>>
>> FYI: Last time I checked, content writing and web design were service
>> based businesses.  I am also currently closing out a 15 hour day of
>> designing/building websites and writing content for my clients, so I
>> think that qualifies me as being in the trenches.
>>
>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/ 
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/ 
>>>>
>>>> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/ 
>>>>
>>>> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>>>>
>>>> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is
>>>> again based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies
>>>> such as Target, Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC,
>>>> MTV, Ruby on Rails, etc. use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their
>>>> sites and applications.  Our friends in the community over at
>>>> Alexander Interactive have been cited numerous times for the
>>>> navigation they developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that showing
>>>> the menu on hover rather than on click would be an enhancement, but
>>>> I also don't think that having to click is a bad thing either.  
>>>> Again, see the following resources:
>>>>
>>> It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns" are.
>>> Just because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't mean
>>> they work in terms of site usability. That is not to say that some
>>> menu dropdowns are not useful. I use them often.
>>>
>>> I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that of a
>>> company that does all of its business on the Web - like Amazon. Yes,
>>> they use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as being dropdowns
>>> and not obscured by other site elements.
>>
>> I wouldn't so easily discount the millions of dollars that these sites
>> generate just because they have a brick-and-mortar presence.  But that
>> is not really the point.  You will never make any progress if you just
>> copy someone else's model.
>>
>> "Don't emulate - innovate. Then test."
>>
>> Oooh, that sounds kind of catchy. Is it too early to copyright that? ;)
>>
>> Actually a more appropriate A/B phrase would be:
>>
>> "Emulate. Innovate. Test."
>>
>> There we go, that sounds more like a tagline...
>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
>>>> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
>>>> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site 
>>>>
>>>> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>>>>
>>>> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our audience
>>>> is", I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have developed
>>>> several client branded themes based on the BizznessTime theme, and
>>>> have received very positive feedback.  When our clients are happy, I
>>>> am happy.  You are right that fancier isn't always better, there is
>>>> research suggesting that doesn't matter.  It may not be better, but
>>>> people think that it is:
>>>>
>>> You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You were
>>> able to do that because you know how to modify and change themes. A
>>> new user (one who downloads a nightly build) will not know how to do
>>> this. That is my target audience.
>>
>> I think that is where our disconnect is.  That might be your target
>> audience, but that is generally not mine, my colleague's, or my
>> employer's target audience.  The decision maker in an enterprise is
>> usually not the person who downloads a nightly build. My focus and
>> intent is to design an application that a CEO, CTO, Operations
>> Manager, etc. can look at and feel confident that his/her 10, 100,
>> 1000, etc. employees will be able to comfortably and effectively use
>> it, and that it will power a site that his/her (hopefully) millions of
>> customers will use and return to consistently.  They are the ones that
>> will ultimately drive the support and distribution of OFBiz.
>>
>>>> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
>>> Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.
>>>> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf 
>>>>
>>>> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf 
>>>>
>>>> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
>>>> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and again, I
>>>> appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too big. The
>>>> padding in and around the inputs and submit buttons can be dialed
>>>> back a bit.  I am working on a patch right now that incorporates
>>>> this feedback, as well as additional feedback and discoveries from
>>>> the themes we have built based on the original BizznessTime theme.
>>> I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
>>> And again, thanks for your efforts.
>>> Ruth
>>
>> Keep it coming Ruth.  I appreciate you taking the time.
>>
>>>> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to
>>>> give the community some insight into my thought process and design
>>>> methodologies.  I hope this helps the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Foster
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> 801.671.0769
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Tim:
>>>>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all
>>>>> labor under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in question
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you
>>>>> referring to?
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order to
>>>>> use OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a theme,
>>>>> then it should be incumbent on the knowledgeable experienced OFBiz
>>>>> user to change themes and not the new user. New users have enough
>>>>> on their plate just learning how the applications work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something
>>>>> without siting references. You insult my intelligence and every
>>>>> other reader on this list by implying that anything concerning
>>>>> recent releases of OFBiz is "easy".
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning the
>>>>>> entire set of backend applications - which is really what needs to
>>>>>> be done. The old theme sucks visually - has no spice, doesn't fit
>>>>>> today's look and feel guidelines AT ALL, looks really old - so I'd
>>>>>> say from someone who does this day in and day out - you're WAY off
>>>>>> when it comes to the way that people react to it (be clear, this
>>>>>> does not talk to using it on a day to day basis).  We've been very
>>>>>> successful in building themes off of Bizzness Time - please are
>>>>>> reacting in a really positive way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime
>>>>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's just a
>>>>>> reorganization of the data that's there to help give it a
>>>>>> facelift.  I'm not talking to users - I'm talking to you and
>>>>>> everyone else who has issues with it.  Fix it ... or go back to
>>>>>> the old theme in your own setup - don't doom the rest of us to
>>>>>> have to go apply first impressions with that really lame setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence - we
>>>>>> just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the early
>>>>>> 2000s instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO, we
>>>>>>> are way off the mark. The backend applications where the
>>>>>>> BiznessTime theme has been applied are designed for end-users who
>>>>>>> may not and probably do not have any experience with HTML or CSS.
>>>>>>> Lets not forget who our audience is here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not doubt
>>>>>>> that it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more accessible
>>>>>>> theme should be the way to go.  Fancier is not always better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user documentation
>>>>>>> covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to try this out and
>>>>>>> post my findings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients because
>>>>>>>> it's WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to everyone's liking /
>>>>>>>> look and feel.  I think it would be a huge mistake to roll it
>>>>>>>> back to the Flat Grey as we have not had any of the same
>>>>>>>> problems once everyone gets over the initial shock of seeing
>>>>>>>> something different.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but it
>>>>>>>> isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the
>>>>>>>> BizznessTime theme, or create one of your own - it's easy to do
>>>>>>>> - this is a much more solid foundation to build on then the old
>>>>>>>> (and looking really old) theme that's been in there since the
>>>>>>>> beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS to make any
>>>>>>>> changes that might not make it so "large"?  It should be pretty
>>>>>>>> easy with this setup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember this
>>>>>>>> is still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd leave
>>>>>>>> this in place and change it to the ugly, ugly in your own
>>>>>>>> installations before I wanted to go back to Flay Grey as a sales
>>>>>>>> tool ....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer to
>>>>>>>>> zoom out.
>>>>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported, and
>>>>>>>>> those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure though...)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject :
>>>>>>>>> create a subtask at
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not
>>>>>>>>> sure it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the
>>>>>>>>> size (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of Flat
>>>>>>>>> Grey" as default
>>>>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size issue,
>>>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and actually
>>>>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2
>>>>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is
>>>>>>>>>> perhaps better.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time
>>>>>>>>>>> as default theme.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz
>>>>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>

[Ryan Foster]

I'll let you have the last on this, as we are in complete agreement on  
those points.  You are right about one thing definitely, a lot of your  
very valid concerns about the ecommerce web store OOTB have been lost  
in the noise.

Anil and his group (of which I have been a part of), have been making  
small, incremental improvements to the ecommerce front-end, but I  
would love to see the kind of awesome community collaboration that  
drove the 9.04 release.  Between the design collaboration with Ean and  
his guys, and Hans, Jacques, Bruno and so many others pitching in on  
the dev side, we ended up with a public facing site, documentation  
site, nightly builds and logs site, and demo application site that was  
cohesive, consistent, modern, and relevant.  People took notice, and  
they were impressed.  In fact, the only thing missing from all this  
was a polished, re-designed, store front demo.

We have beat this to death.  I think we as a community need to say now  
let's pull the trigger.  Redesign the ecommerce front-end.  Make a big  
change.  Make people notice.

To quote Forrest Gump (in my best rural Alabama southern drawl): "And  
that's really all I got to say about that."

Ryan Foster
HotWax Media
801.671.0769
[hidden email]




On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hi Ryan:
>
> Not that I need to get in the last word...
>
> I like your tag lines! Your design points are valid and, for what it  
> is worth, are now new data points for my consideration going forward.
>
> I'm all about innovation. My original point was not that innovation,  
> progress or change for that matter isn't good. My original point -  
> which got lost in the noise - was that building something and then  
> deploying that "something"  without thorough testing is not good. In  
> fact, the consequences of doing that in this very competitive  
> market, could be disastrous. First impressions whether we like it or  
> not, are lasting. And when seemingly simple things don't work as one  
> would expect - for example on the ecommerce web store OOTB - that is  
> not good.
>
> Anyhow, I think we beat this to death. Thanks for the discussion.
>
> Best Regards,
> Ruth
>
> Ryan Foster wrote:
>> Inline...
>>
>> Ryan Foster
>> HotWax Media
>> 801.671.0769
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Ryan:
>>> Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I  
>>> personally think that front-end website design and implementation  
>>> is far more difficult to master then is commonly acknowledged. I  
>>> applaud your efforts. At no time was I trying to disparage or  
>>> dismiss any of the OFBiz work that you or your colleagues have  
>>> contributed.
>>
>> No offense taken.  Like I said, I was just trying to offer some  
>> additional insight into the discussion.
>>
>>>
>>> Please see my other comments inline:
>>>
>>> Ryan Foster wrote:
>>>> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the  
>>>> initial design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from  
>>>> Brainfood's public facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a  
>>>> certain amount of obligation to defend my position.  Let me first  
>>>> start off by saying thank you all very much for this discussion  
>>>> on user interface in general and for the feedback on the  
>>>> BizznessTime theme.  I sometimes feel like a lone wolf in a sea  
>>>> of developers immensely more talented than me when it comes to  
>>>> back-end programming, so I think a small amount of front-end  
>>>> discussion is refreshing.  I take a huge amount of pride in my  
>>>> work, and I welcome any and all feedback, positive or negative,  
>>>> that will allow me to enhance the user experience
>>> IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
>>>> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and  
>>>> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and  
>>>> testing of respected organizations and individuals in user  
>>>> experience and interaction design:
>>>>
>>> Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That  
>>> was never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
>>>> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important  
>>>> content should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be  
>>>> required, do not like to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has  
>>>> been extensive research that tends to suggest that this school of  
>>>> thought is outdated.  Jacob Nielsen discussed this back in 1997
>>>> (!).  See the following links for support:
>>> Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these  
>>> specifically, although I have seen other statistical reports that  
>>> are all over the map as far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  
>>> All of the content writers and site designers that I work with  
>>> insist that best practice is to have the most compelling  
>>> information above the fold. These people are in the trenches day-
>>> in and day-out and are not selling a service.  Just another data  
>>> point.
>>
>> Yes, important information should near the top of the page, I am  
>> not disputing this.  What I am saying is "There is no fold", and  
>> there hasn't been one for quite some time.  This term was ported  
>> from newspaper print design in an attempt to explain a new medium  
>> and technology in terms that were familiar to designers entering  
>> this new media arena.  But the internet is not new anymore, and  
>> between Rich Media enabled mobile phones, integrated/on demand  
>> television, kiosk displays, laptops, and 42-inch cinema screen  
>> monitors, it is simply not relevant to modern web design and  
>> development anymore.  Honestly, between online websites, news  
>> portals, cross-channel aggregation, bloggers, and RSS feeds, I am  
>> not sure that newspapers even use the term "above the fold"  
>> anymore!  :)
>>
>> FYI: Last time I checked, content writing and web design were  
>> service based businesses.  I am also currently closing out a 15  
>> hour day of designing/building websites and writing content for my  
>> clients, so I think that qualifies me as being in the trenches.
>>
>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/
>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/
>>>> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/
>>>> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>>>>
>>>> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is  
>>>> again based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies  
>>>> such as Target, Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC,  
>>>> MTV, Ruby on Rails, etc. use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their  
>>>> sites and applications.  Our friends in the community over at  
>>>> Alexander Interactive have been cited numerous times for the  
>>>> navigation they developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that  
>>>> showing the menu on hover rather than on click would be an  
>>>> enhancement, but I also don't think that having to click is a bad  
>>>> thing either.  Again, see the following resources:
>>>>
>>> It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns"  
>>> are. Just because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't  
>>> mean they work in terms of site usability. That is not to say that  
>>> some menu dropdowns are not useful. I use them often.
>>>
>>> I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that  
>>> of a company that does all of its business on the Web - like  
>>> Amazon. Yes, they use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as  
>>> being dropdowns and not obscured by other site elements.
>>
>> I wouldn't so easily discount the millions of dollars that these  
>> sites generate just because they have a brick-and-mortar presence.  
>> But that is not really the point.  You will never make any progress  
>> if you just copy someone else's model.
>>
>> "Don't emulate - innovate. Then test."
>>
>> Oooh, that sounds kind of catchy. Is it too early to copyright  
>> that? ;)
>>
>> Actually a more appropriate A/B phrase would be:
>>
>> "Emulate. Innovate. Test."
>>
>> There we go, that sounds more like a tagline...
>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
>>>> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
>>>> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site
>>>> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>>>>
>>>> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our  
>>>> audience is", I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have  
>>>> developed several client branded themes based on the BizznessTime  
>>>> theme, and have received very positive feedback.  When our  
>>>> clients are happy, I am happy.  You are right that fancier isn't  
>>>> always better, there is research suggesting that doesn't matter.  
>>>> It may not be better, but people think that it is:
>>>>
>>> You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You  
>>> were able to do that because you know how to modify and change  
>>> themes. A new user (one who downloads a nightly build) will not  
>>> know how to do this. That is my target audience.
>>
>> I think that is where our disconnect is.  That might be your target  
>> audience, but that is generally not mine, my colleague's, or my  
>> employer's target audience.  The decision maker in an enterprise is  
>> usually not the person who downloads a nightly build. My focus and  
>> intent is to design an application that a CEO, CTO, Operations  
>> Manager, etc. can look at and feel confident that his/her 10, 100,  
>> 1000, etc. employees will be able to comfortably and effectively  
>> use it, and that it will power a site that his/her (hopefully)  
>> millions of customers will use and return to consistently.  They  
>> are the ones that will ultimately drive the support and  
>> distribution of OFBiz.
>>
>>>> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
>>> Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.
>>>> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf
>>>> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf
>>>> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
>>>> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf
>>>>
>>>> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and  
>>>> again, I appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too  
>>>> big. The padding in and around the inputs and submit buttons can  
>>>> be dialed back a bit.  I am working on a patch right now that  
>>>> incorporates this feedback, as well as additional feedback and  
>>>> discoveries from the themes we have built based on the original  
>>>> BizznessTime theme.
>>> I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
>>> And again, thanks for your efforts.
>>> Ruth
>>
>> Keep it coming Ruth.  I appreciate you taking the time.
>>
>>>> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to  
>>>> give the community some insight into my thought process and  
>>>> design methodologies.  I hope this helps the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Foster
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> 801.671.0769
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Tim:
>>>>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all  
>>>>> labor under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in  
>>>>> question here.
>>>>>
>>>>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you  
>>>>> referring to?
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order  
>>>>> to use OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a  
>>>>> theme, then it should be incumbent on the knowledgeable  
>>>>> experienced OFBiz user to change themes and not the new user.  
>>>>> New users have enough on their plate just learning how the  
>>>>> applications work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something  
>>>>> without siting references. You insult my intelligence and every  
>>>>> other reader on this list by implying that anything concerning  
>>>>> recent releases of OFBiz is "easy".
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website: http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning  
>>>>>> the entire set of backend applications - which is really what  
>>>>>> needs to be done. The old theme sucks visually - has no spice,  
>>>>>> doesn't fit today's look and feel guidelines AT ALL, looks  
>>>>>> really old - so I'd say from someone who does this day in and  
>>>>>> day out - you're WAY off when it comes to the way that people  
>>>>>> react to it (be clear, this does not talk to using it on a day  
>>>>>> to day basis).  We've been very successful in building themes  
>>>>>> off of Bizzness Time - please are reacting in a really positive  
>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime  
>>>>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's  
>>>>>> just a reorganization of the data that's there to help give it  
>>>>>> a facelift.  I'm not talking to users - I'm talking to you and  
>>>>>> everyone else who has issues with it.  Fix it ... or go back to  
>>>>>> the old theme in your own setup - don't doom the rest of us to  
>>>>>> have to go apply first impressions with that really lame setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence -  
>>>>>> we just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the  
>>>>>> early 2000s instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO,  
>>>>>>> we are way off the mark. The backend applications where the  
>>>>>>> BiznessTime theme has been applied are designed for end-users  
>>>>>>> who may not and probably do not have any experience with HTML  
>>>>>>> or CSS. Lets not forget who our audience is here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not  
>>>>>>> doubt that it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more  
>>>>>>> accessible theme should be the way to go.  Fancier is not  
>>>>>>> always better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user  
>>>>>>> documentation covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to  
>>>>>>> try this out and post my findings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website: http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients  
>>>>>>>> because it's WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to  
>>>>>>>> everyone's liking / look and feel.  I think it would be a  
>>>>>>>> huge mistake to roll it back to the Flat Grey as we have not  
>>>>>>>> had any of the same problems once everyone gets over the  
>>>>>>>> initial shock of seeing something different.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but  
>>>>>>>> it isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the  
>>>>>>>> BizznessTime theme, or create one of your own - it's easy to  
>>>>>>>> do - this is a much more solid foundation to build on then  
>>>>>>>> the old (and looking really old) theme that's been in there  
>>>>>>>> since the beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS  
>>>>>>>> to make any changes that might not make it so "large"?  It  
>>>>>>>> should be pretty easy with this setup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember  
>>>>>>>> this is still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd  
>>>>>>>> leave this in place and change it to the ugly, ugly in your  
>>>>>>>> own installations before I wanted to go back to Flay Grey as  
>>>>>>>> a sales tool ....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer  
>>>>>>>>> to zoom out.
>>>>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported,  
>>>>>>>>> and those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure  
>>>>>>>>> though...)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject :  
>>>>>>>>> create a subtask at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not  
>>>>>>>>> sure it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the  
>>>>>>>>> size (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of  
>>>>>>>>> Flat Grey" as default
>>>>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size  
>>>>>>>>> issue, thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and  
>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2  
>>>>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is  
>>>>>>>>>> perhaps better.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness  
>>>>>>>>>>> Time as default theme.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz  
>>>>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

[Bruno Busco]

There is the possibility, in the back-office, to change the screen
used to display a category detail in the front store.
The default is the "categorydetail" in the
component://ecommerce/widget/CatalogScreens.xml file. This is the
screen that renders the category as a simple list (as it was).
I did create an additional screen "categorydetailmatrix" in the same
file and created seed data to have it loaded.

If you want to change this simply delete the entry
    <ProductCategory productCategoryId="PROMOTIONS"
productCategoryTypeId="CATALOG_CATEGORY"
detailScreen="component://ecommerce/widget/CatalogScreens.xml#categorydetailmatrix"/>

in the specialpurpose\ecommerce\data\DemoProduct.xml file and the old
screen will be used again.
If you want to do a test without changing the seed data delete the
"Detail screen" field here
https://localhost:8443/catalog/control/EditCategory?CATALOG_TOP_CATEGORY=PROMOTIONS&productCategoryId=PROMOTIONS

Hope this helps.
-Bruno




2009/10/15 Ryan Foster <[hidden email]>:

> I'll let you have the last on this, as we are in complete agreement on those
> points.  You are right about one thing definitely, a lot of your very valid
> concerns about the ecommerce web store OOTB have been lost in the noise.
>
> Anil and his group (of which I have been a part of), have been making small,
> incremental improvements to the ecommerce front-end, but I would love to see
> the kind of awesome community collaboration that drove the 9.04 release.
>  Between the design collaboration with Ean and his guys, and Hans, Jacques,
> Bruno and so many others pitching in on the dev side, we ended up with a
> public facing site, documentation site, nightly builds and logs site, and
> demo application site that was cohesive, consistent, modern, and relevant.
>  People took notice, and they were impressed.  In fact, the only thing
> missing from all this was a polished, re-designed, store front demo.
>
> We have beat this to death.  I think we as a community need to say now let's
> pull the trigger.  Redesign the ecommerce front-end.  Make a big change.
>  Make people notice.
>
> To quote Forrest Gump (in my best rural Alabama southern drawl): "And that's
> really all I got to say about that."
>
> Ryan Foster
> HotWax Media
> 801.671.0769
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Hi Ryan:
>>
>> Not that I need to get in the last word...
>>
>> I like your tag lines! Your design points are valid and, for what it is
>> worth, are now new data points for my consideration going forward.
>>
>> I'm all about innovation. My original point was not that innovation,
>> progress or change for that matter isn't good. My original point - which got
>> lost in the noise - was that building something and then deploying that
>> "something"  without thorough testing is not good. In fact, the consequences
>> of doing that in this very competitive market, could be disastrous. First
>> impressions whether we like it or not, are lasting. And when seemingly
>> simple things don't work as one would expect - for example on the ecommerce
>> web store OOTB - that is not good.
>>
>> Anyhow, I think we beat this to death. Thanks for the discussion.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Ruth
>>
>> Ryan Foster wrote:
>>>
>>> Inline...
>>>
>>> Ryan Foster
>>> HotWax Media
>>> 801.671.0769
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Ryan:
>>>> Thanks so much for taking the time to inform the list. I personally
>>>> think that front-end website design and implementation is far more difficult
>>>> to master then is commonly acknowledged. I applaud your efforts. At no time
>>>> was I trying to disparage or dismiss any of the OFBiz work that you or your
>>>> colleagues have contributed.
>>>
>>> No offense taken.  Like I said, I was just trying to offer some
>>> additional insight into the discussion.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please see my other comments inline:
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Foster wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Since my colleagues and I were largely responsible for the initial
>>>>> design of BizznessTime, which borrows very heavily from Brainfood's public
>>>>> facing site design (thanks guys!), I feel a certain amount of obligation to
>>>>> defend my position.  Let me first start off by saying thank you all very
>>>>> much for this discussion on user interface in general and for the feedback
>>>>> on the BizznessTime theme.  I sometimes feel like a lone wolf in a sea of
>>>>> developers immensely more talented than me when it comes to back-end
>>>>> programming, so I think a small amount of front-end discussion is
>>>>> refreshing.  I take a huge amount of pride in my work, and I welcome any and
>>>>> all feedback, positive or negative, that will allow me to enhance the user
>>>>> experience
>>>>
>>>> IMO, the "theme" concept is an excellent addition to OFBiz.
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, many of the key elements of the design were clearly and
>>>>> carefully thought out, and are based on the work, research, and testing of
>>>>> respected organizations and individuals in user experience and interaction
>>>>> design:
>>>>>
>>>> Obviously the design was clearly and carefully thought out. That was
>>>> never in question. Again, I applaud your efforts. Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> In regards to the school of thought that all of the important content
>>>>> should be "above the fold" and that users shouldn't be required, do not like
>>>>> to scroll, will not scroll, etc; there has been extensive research that
>>>>> tends to suggest that this school of thought is outdated.  Jacob Nielsen
>>>>> discussed this back in 1997(!).  See the following links for support:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the references. I have not seen any of these specifically,
>>>> although I have seen other statistical reports that are all over the map as
>>>> far as analyzing results. Just an FYI:  All of the content writers and site
>>>> designers that I work with insist that best practice is to have the most
>>>> compelling information above the fold. These people are in the trenches
>>>> day-in and day-out and are not selling a service.  Just another data point.
>>>
>>> Yes, important information should near the top of the page, I am not
>>> disputing this.  What I am saying is "There is no fold", and there hasn't
>>> been one for quite some time.  This term was ported from newspaper print
>>> design in an attempt to explain a new medium and technology in terms that
>>> were familiar to designers entering this new media arena.  But the internet
>>> is not new anymore, and between Rich Media enabled mobile phones,
>>> integrated/on demand television, kiosk displays, laptops, and 42-inch cinema
>>> screen monitors, it is simply not relevant to modern web design and
>>> development anymore.  Honestly, between online websites, news portals,
>>> cross-channel aggregation, bloggers, and RSS feeds, I am not sure that
>>> newspapers even use the term "above the fold" anymore!  :)
>>>
>>> FYI: Last time I checked, content writing and web design were service
>>> based businesses.  I am also currently closing out a 15 hour day of
>>> designing/building websites and writing content for my clients, so I think
>>> that qualifies me as being in the trenches.
>>>
>>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9712a.html
>>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2006/12/23/unfolding-the-fold/
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/10/05/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-1-visibility-and-scroll-reach/
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blog.clicktale.com/2007/12/04/clicktale-scrolling-research-report-v20-part-2-visitor-attention-and-web-page-exposure/
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2006/08/02/utilizing-the-cut-off-look-to-encourage-users-to-scroll/
>>>>> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of
>>>>>
>>>>> Next, as far as the applications drop down menu, this concept is again
>>>>> based on modern web trends and current research.  Companies such as Target,
>>>>> Walmart, Microsoft, OfficeMax, OfficeDepot, EMC, MTV, Ruby on Rails, etc.
>>>>> use so called "Mega Dropdowns" in their sites and applications.  Our friends
>>>>> in the community over at Alexander Interactive have been cited numerous
>>>>> times for the navigation they developed for ActionEnvelope.  I agree that
>>>>> showing the menu on hover rather than on click would be an enhancement, but
>>>>> I also don't think that having to click is a bad thing either.  Again, see
>>>>> the following resources:
>>>>>
>>>> It remains to be seen just how successful the "Mega Dropdowns" are. Just
>>>> because Target, Microsoft and Walmart use them, doesn't mean they work in
>>>> terms of site usability. That is not to say that some menu dropdowns are not
>>>> useful. I use them often.
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that a better example of a site to emulate is that of a
>>>> company that does all of its business on the Web - like Amazon. Yes, they
>>>> use dropdowns, but they are clearly marked as being dropdowns and not
>>>> obscured by other site elements.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't so easily discount the millions of dollars that these sites
>>> generate just because they have a brick-and-mortar presence.  But that is
>>> not really the point.  You will never make any progress if you just copy
>>> someone else's model.
>>>
>>> "Don't emulate - innovate. Then test."
>>>
>>> Oooh, that sounds kind of catchy. Is it too early to copyright that? ;)
>>>
>>> Actually a more appropriate A/B phrase would be:
>>>
>>> "Emulate. Innovate. Test."
>>>
>>> There we go, that sounds more like a tagline...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.uipattern.com/mega-drop-downs/
>>>>> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html
>>>>> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/03/30/mega-drop-down-menus/
>>>>>
>>>>> http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1647-mega-drop-down-navigation-at-basecamp-and-rails-guides-site
>>>>> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> Finally, as far as the statement "lets not forget who our audience is",
>>>>> I am acutely aware of who are audience is.  We have developed several client
>>>>> branded themes based on the BizznessTime theme, and have received very
>>>>> positive feedback.  When our clients are happy, I am happy.  You are right
>>>>> that fancier isn't always better, there is research suggesting that doesn't
>>>>> matter.  It may not be better, but people think that it is:
>>>>>
>>>> You have taken the out-of-the-box themes and branded them. You were able
>>>> to do that because you know how to modify and change themes. A new user (one
>>>> who downloads a nightly build) will not know how to do this. That is my
>>>> target audience.
>>>
>>> I think that is where our disconnect is.  That might be your target
>>> audience, but that is generally not mine, my colleague's, or my employer's
>>> target audience.  The decision maker in an enterprise is usually not the
>>> person who downloads a nightly build. My focus and intent is to design an
>>> application that a CEO, CTO, Operations Manager, etc. can look at and feel
>>> confident that his/her 10, 100, 1000, etc. employees will be able to
>>> comfortably and effectively use it, and that it will power a site that
>>> his/her (hopefully) millions of customers will use and return to
>>> consistently.  They are the ones that will ultimately drive the support and
>>> distribution of OFBiz.
>>>
>>>>> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofeyecandy
>>>>
>>>> Big fan of alistapart.com. Can't go wrong following that lead.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/pres/chi2007/jansen_branding_of_search_engines.pdf
>>>>> http://sigchi.org/chi97/proceedings/paper/nt.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spillers-emotiondesign-proceedings.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> I do agree with many points that have been made so far, and again, I
>>>>> appreciate the feedback.  The font-size is a little too big. The padding in
>>>>> and around the inputs and submit buttons can be dialed back a bit.  I am
>>>>> working on a patch right now that incorporates this feedback, as well as
>>>>> additional feedback and discoveries from the themes we have built based on
>>>>> the original BizznessTime theme.
>>>>
>>>> I will continue to give feedback as long as you listen.
>>>> And again, thanks for your efforts.
>>>> Ruth
>>>
>>> Keep it coming Ruth.  I appreciate you taking the time.
>>>
>>>>> I apologize for the very long-winded email, but I just wanted to give
>>>>> the community some insight into my thought process and design methodologies.
>>>>>  I hope this helps the discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ryan Foster
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> 801.671.0769
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Tim:
>>>>>> I fully understand your point of view and the constraints we all labor
>>>>>> under. Whether the old theme sucks or not is not in question here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First question I have for you is what "guidelines" are you referring
>>>>>> to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Secondly, why should a new user have to change a theme in order to use
>>>>>> OFBiz applications. If, as you say its easy to change a theme, then it
>>>>>> should be incumbent on the knowledgeable experienced OFBiz user to change
>>>>>> themes and not the new user. New users have enough on their plate just
>>>>>> learning how the applications work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thirdly, please don't throw around "its easy" to do something without
>>>>>> siting references. You insult my intelligence and every other reader on this
>>>>>> list by implying that anything concerning recent releases of OFBiz is
>>>>>> "easy".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are all working within the constraints of _not_ redesigning the
>>>>>>> entire set of backend applications - which is really what needs to be done.
>>>>>>> The old theme sucks visually - has no spice, doesn't fit today's look and
>>>>>>> feel guidelines AT ALL, looks really old - so I'd say from someone who does
>>>>>>> this day in and day out - you're WAY off when it comes to the way that
>>>>>>> people react to it (be clear, this does not talk to using it on a day to day
>>>>>>> basis).  We've been very successful in building themes off of Bizzness Time
>>>>>>> - please are reacting in a really positive way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is nothing other than a visual change on the BizznessTime
>>>>>>> theme.  There are no other extra widgets or the like.  it's just a
>>>>>>> reorganization of the data that's there to help give it a facelift.  I'm not
>>>>>>> talking to users - I'm talking to you and everyone else who has issues with
>>>>>>> it.  Fix it ... or go back to the old theme in your own setup - don't doom
>>>>>>> the rest of us to have to go apply first impressions with that really lame
>>>>>>> setup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the documentation - I'm not sure - checkout Confluence - we
>>>>>>> just dug in and tried to bring the backend apps out of the early 2000s
>>>>>>> instead of letting it sit stagnant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello Tim:
>>>>>>>> If this a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz, then IMO, we are
>>>>>>>> way off the mark. The backend applications where the BiznessTime theme has
>>>>>>>> been applied are designed for end-users who may not and probably do not have
>>>>>>>> any experience with HTML or CSS. Lets not forget who our audience is here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the foundation, as you say is so solid (and I have not doubt that
>>>>>>>> it is), then reverting back to a simpler yet more accessible theme should be
>>>>>>>> the way to go.  Fancier is not always better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On another note, could you point me to the end-user documentation
>>>>>>>> covering  creating new themes. I'd be happy to try this out and post my
>>>>>>>> findings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman, Author, Mentor & OFBiz Enthusiast
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> Looking for more OFBiz info, please visit my website:
>>>>>>>> http://www.myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We exclusively use the BizznessTime theme with clients because it's
>>>>>>>>> WAY easier to change, skin and adapt to everyone's liking / look and feel.
>>>>>>>>>  I think it would be a huge mistake to roll it back to the Flat Grey as we
>>>>>>>>> have not had any of the same problems once everyone gets over the initial
>>>>>>>>> shock of seeing something different.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the community wants to roll it back - then go for it - but it
>>>>>>>>> isn't wise.  FIX the problems that you don't like in the BizznessTime theme,
>>>>>>>>> or create one of your own - it's easy to do - this is a much more solid
>>>>>>>>> foundation to build on then the old (and looking really old) theme that's
>>>>>>>>> been in there since the beginning.  Have any of you tried to edit the CSS to
>>>>>>>>> make any changes that might not make it so "large"?  It should be pretty
>>>>>>>>> easy with this setup.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anyways, think on it and do what you will do, but remember this is
>>>>>>>>> still a tool for convincing people to use OFBiz.  I'd leave this in place
>>>>>>>>> and change it to the ugly, ugly in your own installations before I wanted to
>>>>>>>>> go back to Flay Grey as a sales tool ....
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:40 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So far,
>>>>>>>>>> * it seems that most people find things too large and prefer to
>>>>>>>>>> zoom out.
>>>>>>>>>> * it seems also that not much specific bugs were reported, and
>>>>>>>>>> those reported should be easily fixed (not quite sure though...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I repeat myself about where to report about this subject : create
>>>>>>>>>> a subtask at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In his 1st reply Chris Snow suggested a change. But I'm not sure
>>>>>>>>>> it's enough for doing the same thing as a zoom out
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we could ask Ryan Foster if it's possble to shrink the size
>>>>>>>>>> (of everything ) else we may vote for the "return of Flat Grey" as default
>>>>>>>>>> theme.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What do you people think ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>> PS : Hans I saw you opened a subtask for the field size issue,
>>>>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure the Business theme looks good but.....
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The general problem is that the characters, fields and actually
>>>>>>>>>>> everything is far too big....If i specify a field to be 2
>>>>>>>>>>> characters, at
>>>>>>>>>>> least 5 fit in....
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So set the default to flat_gray in general properties is perhaps
>>>>>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:19 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time as
>>>>>>>>>>>> default theme.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you use it?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com <http://Antwebsystems.com>: Quality OFBiz
>>>>>>>>>>> services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Pierre,

Did you create a Jira under https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398 for this ?

Thanks

Jacques

From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>

> Currently the search forms position search fields vertically in the second
> column with labels in the first column.
> E.g. in SFA-accounts the user can default search on account (party) id and
> name.
>
> In my opinion the search bar should have the labels on the first row and
> search fields on a second row.
> Moreover I would like to have the place included in the search form by
> default and a market segment (which isn't available right now).
>
> And by default I would show all accounts (like it is in opportunities.
>
> On the profile of an account opportunities are now in the right segment. I
> would like to see it in a seperate segment spreading accros the entire width
> of the screen, showing more information, e.g. stage, type, currency, amount,
> probalility and next step. Plus the functionality to click through and edit.
> Plus the functionality to create a new opportunity from that placeholder.
> Plus the functionality to delete an opportunity.
>
> Hopefully this elaborates a bit.
>
> 2009/10/14 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>
>> Hi Pierre,
>>
>> Inline...
>>
>> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>>
>>> But even there some improvements
>>> can be made. E.g. in SFA-accounts the search fields could be spread more
>>> horizontally than it is now. And I guess that can be said for more
>>> layouts.
>>>
>>
>> Could you explain more this last point, I don't get it
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacquees
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>>
>>> 2009/10/12 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>  Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to know what the community thinks about Bizness Time as default
>>>> theme.
>>>>
>>>> Do you use it?
>>>> Do you change for another theme ?
>>>> Which one fo you prefer?
>>>> Did you find bugs in one of the theme but not another?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Erwan,

Finally yes, why not opening a sub-task under https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398 ?
At least it will be recorded...

Jacques

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>

> Thanks Erwan,
>
> I'd't not say that everyone is zooming out, for the moment very few persons seems concerned...
> So maybe we should better ask if people use Bizness Time mostly zoomed out ?
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Erwan de FERRIERES" <[hidden email]>
>> if everyone is zooming out the bizness theme, maybe we should thinking about reducing the font/etc... sizes.
>> Keeping the bizness time provide a more modern interface than the flat grey, and may be more attractive to new users.
>> But I'm also part of the ones who switch to bluelight or flatgrey...
>>
>> Le 12/10/2009 17:59, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> ../..
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Erwan
>>
>
>

[Erwan de FERRIERES-3]

Le 22/11/2009 23:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Hi Erwan,
>
> Finally yes, why not opening a sub-task under
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398 ?
> At least it will be recorded...
Hi Jacques,

this issue you created is what I meant, so maybe it's not necessary to
create a new one !

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3042

Cheers,

--
Erwan

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks for the reminder Erwan!

Jacques

From: "Erwan de FERRIERES" <[hidden email]>

> Le 22/11/2009 23:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Hi Erwan,
>>
>> Finally yes, why not opening a sub-task under
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2398 ?
>> At least it will be recorded...
> Hi Jacques,
>
> this issue you created is what I meant, so maybe it's not necessary to create a new one !
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3042
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Erwan
>