Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's brainstorm!

[cjhowe]

Hey Vinay, 


I'm very concerend on the UI stuff getting used "properly" 
and am trying to find some concensus on what "properly" is.
I think once that's resolved, these things will come along
quite easily

Can you clarify on the bad html? To my knowledge it all
validates, or are you referring to something else?

As far as poor looking screens, I think you're just too used
to them.  But they haven't changed because that's a pretty easy
niche for someone to fill commercially and what's poor in one
person's book is fabulous in someone else's.

When you say "theme capability", you mean "dynamic theme capability", 
correct?  Because otherwise, OFBiz already has theme capability through CSS
and through the screen decorator.  And if you wanted to add in the
differences application approach and the parameter.mainDecoratorLocation variable
defined in each webapps web.xml file, you can put together a
pretty decent
 theming design.

As far as where I see the limitations in the OFbiz appearance I
think stems from underutilizing the screen widget's decorator. (ie
leaving screenlet definitions for the freemarker file).
This can be quickly resolved by having people comment on jira issue 
OFBIZ-833.


======Vinay wrote:

2. Rough edges (bad html, poor looking screens, no theme capabilities, etc.)
block visibility to its internal elegance. 

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Adrian Crum]

A setup wizard has been suggested in the past, but no one has stepped forward to
do the development on it.


Chris Medinger wrote:

> I was initially going to suggest a space on one of the
> sites be made for
> user-contributed downloadable templates of databases
> that can be swapped
> in during the install process to replace the default
> business template.  
> But managing the cleanliness of submissions could
> become a
> labor-intensive job, and if hundreds of templates were
> uploaded, then
> you would practically lose the increase in
> configuration simplicity.
>
> As I was typing I realized it would be even better if
> there were a set
> of small database-building scripts that could be
> parsed together by a
> setup program where the user picks options that
> pertain to his/her
> business, sort of how certain proprietary book keeping
> programs ask
> about the general nature of your business before
> assembling all of the
> relevant initial accounts together.
>
> example:  I own a retail store that sells items I buy
> from two or three
> different wholesalers, and I'm interested in moving my
> books and
> inventory management over to OFBiz.  In addition, I've
> decided to put up
> a web store to draw more non-local business, and have
> hit a deal with a
> local shipping store.  So in the install options, I
> check (please
> forgive for not using exact terminology): Retail Store
> w/POS option to
> be managed by OFBiz (quantity 1), Web site (quantity
> 1), wholesale accts
> (quantity 3), Shipping contract (quantity 1), maybe
> even Employees (5),
> Merchant acct. (quantity 1).  The inventory and accts.
> are dealt with in
> migration from the software I was using before, so
> there's no point in
> doing in-depth analysis of this.
>
> So after the db-building script has been parsed
> together and run, the
> user installing the program will also be given a
> likewise
> parsed-together checklist or set of instructions on
> finalizing
> configuration for each part (it's really just a
> customized version of
> the configuration section in the installation manual).
>
> Is something like that possible, or totally ludicrous?
>  Is it possible
> to build a single parser engine, that would be
> compatible with the
> different database servers people are using (I'm
> assuming so since this
> you can install the initial database on any of them)?
>
> --Chris Medinger
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Walter Vaughan]

S Pole wrote:

> My 2 cents after evaluating (and deciding against) OFBiz for our
> organization:

I am up to my neck in trying to learn as much about OFBiz as possible right now.
Could you please share what you found that was a better fit for you?

ERP5's liveCD won't install on any Dell I have, just my Toshiba laptop, so I
haven't really explored it, and I'm planning on putting a Compiere/Fyracle
server but I would rather use MySQL 5+ as the DBMS layer.

I am completely agreeing with the choir here about greater adoption issues. When
I hear "'Their Demo Suck's' right out of the box", that's a negative I have to
spend capital overcoming without even getting to the heart of what OFBiz could
offer us.

--
Walter
 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Adrian Crum]

The biggest drawback to Compiere is the SQL embedded in the code. You're pretty
much locked into a particular database.

Walter Vaughan wrote:

> S Pole wrote:
>
>
>>My 2 cents after evaluating (and deciding against) OFBiz for our
>>organization:
>
>
> I am up to my neck in trying to learn as much about OFBiz as possible right now.
> Could you please share what you found that was a better fit for you?
>
> ERP5's liveCD won't install on any Dell I have, just my Toshiba laptop, so I
> haven't really explored it, and I'm planning on putting a Compiere/Fyracle
> server but I would rather use MySQL 5+ as the DBMS layer.
>
> I am completely agreeing with the choir here about greater adoption issues. When
> I hear "'Their Demo Suck's' right out of the box", that's a negative I have to
> spend capital overcoming without even getting to the heart of what OFBiz could
> offer us.
>
> --
> Walter
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Vinay Agarwal]

First, I have no intent to offend anyone—I am as guilty as anyone else for any of the issues.

 

My definition of bad HTML if any of the following is true

1. HTML does not validate to the doctype specified. More specifically, there are numerous violations of the following type
1. Some ftl’s, due to their complexity and depending upon the value of the conditionals, do not close table/td/tr/div/form correctly.
2. URL are not url encoded
3. Tags not being closed (commonly input)
2. HTML does not render fairly similarly in the top two browsers (IE and FF).

 

FTL vs Widget: I believe the official line is the widgets are only for simple screens and ecommerce screens are expected to be made with ftl.

 

Theme capability: I am not sure of the dynamic vs just plain theme terminology. I meant that for what is called to be theme in mambo or egroupware. One can select the theme which changes entire look and feel of the application.

 

Regards,

Vinay Agarwal

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Chris Howe
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 11:06 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's brainstorm!

 

Hey Vinay, 





I'm very concerend on the UI stuff getting used "properly" 

and am trying to find some concensus on what "properly" is.

I think once that's resolved, these things will come along

quite easily



Can you clarify on the bad html? To my knowledge it all

validates, or are you referring to something else?



As far as poor looking screens, I think you're just too used

to them.  But they haven't changed because that's a pretty easy

niche for someone to fill commercially and what's poor in one

person's book is fabulous in someone else's.



When you say "theme capability", you mean "dynamic theme capability", 

correct?  Because otherwise, OFBiz already has theme capability through CSS

and through the screen decorator.  And if you wanted to add in the

differences application approach and the parameter.mainDecoratorLocation variable

defined in each webapps web.xml file, you can put together a

pretty decent

 theming design.



As far as where I see the limitations in the OFbiz appearance I

think stems from underutilizing the screen widget's decorator. (ie

leaving screenlet definitions for the freemarker file).

This can be quickly resolved by having people comment on jira issue 

OFBIZ-833.





======Vinay wrote:



2. Rough edges (bad html, poor looking screens, no theme capabilities, etc.)

block visibility to its internal elegance. 

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[BJ Freeman]

Vinay:
a few years ago I had a similar discussion. This was before the widgets
were in place. I was more interested in user friendly screens.

To make a short story, Instead of telling everyone how what they had did
not work,  I created my own application, and created my own screens.  I
still accessed all the application, just a different UI.

Since it was a seperate application, I did not change what was being
done from the SVN, and my code remained unchange on Updates.  I do have
to update my application, at times, but not often.

I have found this be to benificial and lets ofbiz continue without
effecting my work.



Vinay Agarwal sent the following on 5/11/06 12:09 PM:

> First, I have no intent to offend anyone-I am as guilty as anyone else for
> any of the issues.
>
>  
>
> My definition of bad HTML if any of the following is true
>
> 1. HTML does not validate to the doctype specified. More specifically,
> there are numerous violations of the following type
>
> a. Some ftl's, due to their complexity and depending upon the value of
> the conditionals, do not close table/td/tr/div/form correctly.
> b. URL are not url encoded
> c. Tags not being closed (commonly input)
>
> 2. HTML does not render fairly similarly in the top two browsers (IE
> and FF).
>
>  
>
> FTL vs Widget: I believe the official line is the widgets are only for
> simple screens and ecommerce screens are expected to be made with ftl.
>
>  
>
> Theme capability: I am not sure of the dynamic vs just plain theme
> terminology. I meant that for what is called to be theme in mambo or
> egroupware. One can select the theme which changes entire look and feel of
> the application.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Vinay Agarwal
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On Behalf Of Chris Howe
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 11:06 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's
> brainstorm!
>
>  
>
> Hey Vinay,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm very concerend on the UI stuff getting used "properly"
>
>
> and am trying to find some concensus on what "properly" is.
>
>
> I think once that's resolved, these things will come along
>
>
> quite easily
>
>
>
>
>
> Can you clarify on the bad html? To my knowledge it all
>
>
> validates, or are you referring to something else?
>
>
>
>
>
> As far as poor looking screens, I think you're just too used
>
>
> to them.  But they haven't changed because that's a pretty easy
>
>
> niche for someone to fill commercially and what's poor in one
>
>
> person's book is fabulous in someone else's.
>
>
>
>
>
> When you say "theme capability", you mean "dynamic theme capability",
>
>
> correct?  Because otherwise, OFBiz already has theme capability through CSS
>
>
> and through the screen decorator.  And if you wanted to add in the
>
>
> differences application approach and the parameter.mainDecoratorLocation
> variable
>
>
> defined in each webapps web.xml file, you can put together a
>
>
> pretty decent
>  theming design.
>
>
>
>
>
> As far as where I see the limitations in the OFbiz appearance I
>
>
> think stems from underutilizing the screen widget's decorator. (ie
>
>
> leaving screenlet definitions for the freemarker file).
>
>
> This can be quickly resolved by having people comment on jira issue
>
>
> OFBIZ-833.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ======Vinay wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> 2. Rough edges (bad html, poor looking screens, no theme capabilities, etc.)
>
>
> block visibility to its internal elegance.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[BJ Freeman]

on that note I am finishing up my setup. Part is in webtools and part
that is specific to my application is in my space.

I know I have been promising a lot, and I apologize for delays.
I have finally got my design systems back up to a level to start turning
out code.
Hopefully you will see some of this thru the next few months.

Adrian Crum sent the following on 5/11/06 11:06 AM:

> A setup wizard has been suggested in the past, but no one has stepped forward to
> do the development on it.
>
>
> Chris Medinger wrote:
>
>
>>I was initially going to suggest a space on one of the
>>sites be made for
>>user-contributed downloadable templates of databases
>>that can be swapped
>>in during the install process to replace the default
>>business template.  
>>But managing the cleanliness of submissions could
>>become a
>>labor-intensive job, and if hundreds of templates were
>>uploaded, then
>>you would practically lose the increase in
>>configuration simplicity.
>>
>>As I was typing I realized it would be even better if
>>there were a set
>>of small database-building scripts that could be
>>parsed together by a
>>setup program where the user picks options that
>>pertain to his/her
>>business, sort of how certain proprietary book keeping
>>programs ask
>>about the general nature of your business before
>>assembling all of the
>>relevant initial accounts together.
>>
>>example:  I own a retail store that sells items I buy
>>from two or three
>>different wholesalers, and I'm interested in moving my
>>books and
>>inventory management over to OFBiz.  In addition, I've
>>decided to put up
>>a web store to draw more non-local business, and have
>>hit a deal with a
>>local shipping store.  So in the install options, I
>>check (please
>>forgive for not using exact terminology): Retail Store
>>w/POS option to
>>be managed by OFBiz (quantity 1), Web site (quantity
>>1), wholesale accts
>>(quantity 3), Shipping contract (quantity 1), maybe
>>even Employees (5),
>>Merchant acct. (quantity 1).  The inventory and accts.
>>are dealt with in
>>migration from the software I was using before, so
>>there's no point in
>>doing in-depth analysis of this.
>>
>>So after the db-building script has been parsed
>>together and run, the
>>user installing the program will also be given a
>>likewise
>>parsed-together checklist or set of instructions on
>>finalizing
>>configuration for each part (it's really just a
>>customized version of
>>the configuration section in the installation manual).
>>
>>Is something like that possible, or totally ludicrous?
>> Is it possible
>>to build a single parser engine, that would be
>>compatible with the
>>different database servers people are using (I'm
>>assuming so since this
>>you can install the initial database on any of them)?
>>
>>--Chris Medinger
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>http://mail.yahoo.com 
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>[hidden email]
>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Chris Medinger]

If you need naive user testing for it, I'm perfect for the job.  ;)  Be happy to assist.

BJ Freeman wrote:

on that note I am finishing up my setup. Part is in webtools and part 
that is specific to my application is in my space.

I know I have been promising a lot, and I apologize for delays.
I have finally got my design systems back up to a level to start turning 
out code.
Hopefully you will see some of this thru the next few months.

Adrian Crum sent the following on 5/11/06 11:06 AM:
  

A setup wizard has been suggested in the past, but no one has stepped forward to 
do the development on it.


Chris Medinger wrote:


    

I was initially going to suggest a space on one of the
sites be made for 
user-contributed downloadable templates of databases
that can be swapped 
in during the install process to replace the default
business template.  
But managing the cleanliness of submissions could
become a 
labor-intensive job, and if hundreds of templates were
uploaded, then 
you would practically lose the increase in
configuration simplicity.

As I was typing I realized it would be even better if
there were a set 
of small database-building scripts that could be
parsed together by a 
setup program where the user picks options that
pertain to his/her 
business, sort of how certain proprietary book keeping
programs ask 
about the general nature of your business before
assembling all of the 
relevant initial accounts together.

example:  I own a retail store that sells items I buy
      

>from two or three 
    

different wholesalers, and I'm interested in moving my
books and 
inventory management over to OFBiz.  In addition, I've
decided to put up 
a web store to draw more non-local business, and have
hit a deal with a 
local shipping store.  So in the install options, I
check (please 
forgive for not using exact terminology): Retail Store
w/POS option to 
be managed by OFBiz (quantity 1), Web site (quantity
1), wholesale accts 
(quantity 3), Shipping contract (quantity 1), maybe
even Employees (5), 
Merchant acct. (quantity 1).  The inventory and accts.
are dealt with in 
migration from the software I was using before, so
there's no point in 
doing in-depth analysis of this.

So after the db-building script has been parsed
together and run, the 
user installing the program will also be given a
likewise 
parsed-together checklist or set of instructions on
finalizing 
configuration for each part (it's really just a
customized version of 
the configuration section in the installation manual).

Is something like that possible, or totally ludicrous?
Is it possible 
to build a single parser engine, that would be
compatible with the 
different database servers people are using (I'm
assuming so since this 
you can install the initial database on any of them)?

--Chris Medinger

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

      

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

    

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users


  

--------------030706000304030307080309--

---

Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Si Chen-2]

Interesting twist in the discussion.  I was just speaking with someone about UI.  I think what you highlight as problems are actually opportunities.  To wit,

1.  It is fairly easily to produce new "skins" for OFBiz.  Just write your own .CSS files and replace the ones currently in use.  In fact, you can try to sell these as packs to other people--there are many template packages for Mambo, and that's one of the best features of that project.  It could be a good way for you to help the rest of the community, make some money, and promote your own web design skills.

2.  The bigger issue is the flow of the UI - how screens relate to each other, and how tasks can be performed.  Some of the screens are very data model-centric.  While such screens could be useful, users typically complain of having to go to too many screens (sometimes across applications) to do the same thing. 

Now everything to fix this is available in OFBiz today, and you can create great UI with the controller, screen widget, form widget, and CSS.  Just look at our CRM application, for example, or some of the sites out there that run OFBiz.  It's just a matter of somebody doing it.  Again, I think we could use a Mambo-like model and have a community of add-ons or modules with different useability patterns, similar to how there are many desktops for Linux.

Taking it even a step further, let's say that OFBiz's real strengths are the data model, the business logic, and the modular architecture.  Ok, so then what's the best tool for building great UI, and why don't we integrate it into OFBiz or build a separate UI for OFBIZ with it?  I don't think Struts, JSP with Tiles, webmacro, or velocity would necessarily be that different from what we have now.  But should we be looking at Ruby or PHP + OFBiz?  Java portlets, so we could use a portal server (like www.liferay.com, which happens to be MIT PL)?  Let's think outside the box here...

Si

Vinay Agarwal wrote:

First, I have no intent to offend anyone—I am as guilty as anyone else for any of the issues.

 

My definition of bad HTML if any of the following is true

1. HTML does not validate to the doctype specified. More specifically, there are numerous violations of the following type
1. Some ftl’s, due to their complexity and depending upon the value of the conditionals, do not close table/td/tr/div/form correctly.
2. URL are not url encoded
3. Tags not being closed (commonly input)
2. HTML does not render fairly similarly in the top two browsers (IE and FF).

 

FTL vs Widget: I believe the official line is the widgets are only for simple screens and ecommerce screens are expected to be made with ftl.

 

Theme capability: I am not sure of the dynamic vs just plain theme terminology. I meant that for what is called to be theme in mambo or egroupware. One can select the theme which changes entire look and feel of the application.

 

Regards,

Vinay Agarwal

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Chris Howe
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 11:06 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's brainstorm!

 

Hey Vinay, 





I'm very concerend on the UI stuff getting used "properly" 

and am trying to find some concensus on what "properly" is.

I think once that's resolved, these things will come along

quite easily



Can you clarify on the bad html? To my knowledge it all

validates, or are you referring to something else?



As far as poor looking screens, I think you're just too used

to them.  But they haven't changed because that's a pretty easy

niche for someone to fill commercially and what's poor in one

person's book is fabulous in someone else's.



When you say "theme capability", you mean "dynamic theme capability", 

correct?  Because otherwise, OFBiz already has theme capability through CSS

and through the screen decorator.  And if you wanted to add in the

differences application approach and the parameter.mainDecoratorLocation variable

defined in each webapps web.xml file, you can put together a

pretty decent

 theming design.



As far as where I see the limitations in the OFbiz appearance I

think stems from underutilizing the screen widget's decorator. (ie

leaving screenlet definitions for the freemarker file).

This can be quickly resolved by having people comment on jira issue 

OFBIZ-833.





======Vinay wrote:



2. Rough edges (bad html, poor looking screens, no theme capabilities, etc.)

block visibility to its internal elegance. 

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Adrian Crum]

Si Chen wrote:
> 1.  It is fairly easily to produce new "skins" for OFBiz.  Just write
> your own .CSS files and replace the ones currently in use.  In fact, you
> can try to sell these as packs to other people--there are many template
> packages for Mambo, and that's one of the best features of that
> project.  It could be a good way for you to help the rest of the
> community, make some money, and promote your own web design skills.

Skins could be a part of the main project, if we can implement what I just
uploaded to Jira:

http://jira.undersunconsulting.com/browse/OFBIZ-880

Right now, OFBiz is hard coded to use one css file. The changes I've suggested
makes the OFBiz UI more flexible.

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Adrian Crum]

Si Chen wrote:
> 2.  The bigger issue is the flow of the UI - how screens relate to each
> other, and how tasks can be performed.  Some of the screens are very
> data model-centric.  While such screens could be useful, users typically
> complain of having to go to too many screens (sometimes across
> applications) to do the same thing.

One of the very first changes we made here was eliminating component tabs that
the user doesn't have permission to use. We just added permissions checks to the
appheader.ftl files to control what tabs are displayed.

I don't know if any work has been done on this recently, but when I first
started using OFBiz it was very confusing to have tabs and buttons displayed
which, when pressed, popped up an error message saying that I don't have
permission to do that.

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Lei Gao-2]

I agree, First, I think the people who's working on OFBiz framework already did great job to make this product better, but as all of us knew, we need to ensure that the customers like what they see on the screen. Now OFBiz's screen is very confusing to customers who do not anything about 'party, relationship, or entity..', but who want to see 'product, order, invoice, customer, company, expense...'.

I think if OFBiz want to become a business framework, rather than a development framework, at least, the GUI part need to be very business-friendly. The current GUI makes sense to developers but not to developer's customer. So far, that's the biggest difficulty I have to introduce this product to a new customer, I need to explain them each screen and what's the idea behind that.

I think a GUI customizing tools is a great enhancement to gain more adoptions for OFBiz.

Lei

On 5/11/06, Vinay Agarwal <[hidden email]> wrote:

First, I have no intent to offend anyone—I am as guilty as anyone else for any of the issues.

 

My definition of bad HTML if any of the following is true

1. HTML does not validate to the doctype specified. More specifically, there are numerous violations of the following type
1. Some ftl's, due to their complexity and depending upon the value of the conditionals, do not close table/td/tr/div/form correctly.
2. URL are not url encoded
3. Tags not being closed (commonly input)
2. HTML does not render fairly similarly in the top two browsers (IE and FF).

 

FTL vs Widget: I believe the official line is the widgets are only for simple screens and ecommerce screens are expected to be made with ftl.

 

Theme capability: I am not sure of the dynamic vs just plain theme terminology. I meant that for what is called to be theme in mambo or egroupware. One can select the theme which changes entire look and feel of the application.

 

Regards,

Vinay Agarwal

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Chris Howe
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 11:06 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's brainstorm!

 

Hey Vinay, 





I'm very concerend on the UI stuff getting used "properly" 

and am trying to find some concensus on what "properly" is.

I think once that's resolved, these things will come along

quite easily



Can you clarify on the bad html? To my knowledge it all

validates, or are you referring to something else?



As far as poor looking screens, I think you're just too used

to them.  But they haven't changed because that's a pretty easy

niche for someone to fill commercially and what's poor in one

person's book is fabulous in someone else's.



When you say "theme capability", you mean "dynamic theme capability", 

correct?  Because otherwise, OFBiz already has theme capability through CSS

and through the screen decorator.  And if you wanted to add in the

differences application approach and the parameter.mainDecoratorLocation variable

defined in each webapps web.xml file, you can put together a

pretty decent

 theming design.



As far as where I see the limitations in the OFbiz appearance I

think stems from underutilizing the screen widget's decorator. (ie

leaving screenlet definitions for the freemarker file).

This can be quickly resolved by having people comment on jira issue 

OFBIZ-833.





======Vinay wrote:



2. Rough edges (bad html, poor looking screens, no theme capabilities, etc.)

block visibility to its internal elegance. 

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank"> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[davidnwelton]

>  2.  The bigger issue is the flow of the UI - how screens relate to each
> other, and how tasks can be performed.  Some of the screens are very data
> model-centric.  While such screens could be useful, users typically complain
> of having to go to too many screens (sometimes across applications) to do
> the same thing.

+1

When I showed my boss the order process to order from a supplier, it
seemed like a very long chain of events.  His conclusion was that
OFBiz was not used by anyone doing a large volume of business because
going through all that clicking for every supplier order is not a
feasible proposition.

(I think that OFBiz' superior data model and architecture means that
adding higher-throughput order processing should be easy, but that's
another thread...)

>  Taking it even a step further, let's say that OFBiz's real strengths are
> the data model, the business logic, and the modular architecture.  Ok, so
> then what's the best tool for building great UI, and why don't we integrate
> it into OFBiz or build a separate UI for OFBIZ with it?  I don't think
> Struts, JSP with Tiles, webmacro, or velocity would necessarily be that
> different from what we have now.  But should we be looking at Ruby or PHP +
> OFBiz?  Java portlets, so we could use a portal server (like
> www.liferay.com, which happens to be MIT PL)?  Let's think outside the box
> here...

Ruby on Rails is really cool, and I'd heartily encourage everyone to
take a look at it.  However, I don't think the problem is the tools,
really, it's just a matter of getting the right people to look at and
work with the application look, feel and flow.

The right people may very well be individuals who do not have
experience with the data model - it's easy to get too close to an
application's internals so that it's difficult to look at it with
'fresh' eyes.

Also, if I may venture a few thoughts... there are some people who are
more data oriented than visually oriented ( www.dedasys.com for
instance, doesn't run much risk of winning a beauty contest:-).  I've
noticed that both www.ofbiz.org as well as the OFBiz apps themselves
have a similar text-heavy look.  Compare with these guys, the latest
in trendy, web2.0 fad applications: http://www.37signals.com/

Of course, OFBiz attempts to do much more complex things than they do,
but just a dash of that sort of design might liven things up some.

--
David N. Welton
 - http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/

Linux, Open Source Consulting
 - http://www.dedasys.com/
 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Si Chen-2]

David,

I think your comment is apt.  There are many easy fixes that would make the UI of OFBiz a lot better, starting with fixing missing UI labels.  Then there are also things where buttons can be placed on the same screen to reduce back and forth action.  For example, there's no reason why "Cancel" and "Approve", etc. type of buttons should not be standard on lists of things.

So if you're reading this, please don't be shy--*send in your patches!!!*  There's somebody who can improve the UI in OFBiz, and that's YOU!

At a deeper level, the issue is this: there are many tabs because each of those tabs contain a lot of information.  If you cram all of them on one screen, I can guarantee people will complain: way too much information.  You then have to make choices and eliminate some tabs, and those choices then reduce the functionality.  Then some people will complain: it doesn't do what I need.

David (Jones) brought this up originally when he said the UI should be generic to permit maximum range of applications.  When he said that, I thought "This is nuts!  The project will be doomed."  But some time passes, and I think he has a good point.  Good UI design is, in my humble opinion, "Make simple things simple, but make anything possible."  Look at OS X: the screens are beautiful and intuitive, but they don't let you do everything.  If you need to do, though, you can always fire up a little terminal and use the command line.  Even Windows, Gnome, KDE allow for that, though maybe not as well as OS X.

So think of the current OFBIZ UI maybe as your "command line UI", and let's collaboratively build other views and UI on top of it.  You can put them into the specialized/ branch (Ok, just me talking here--you'd need the others to sign off on that one) like Hans did for open travel systems, make it as an add-on module, or sell it, either as an add-on or as part of your own OFBiz hosted service.  And when we do this, let's just think outside of the box and identify the best tools to do it with.  It's great that you think form- and screen-widget tools are good, but if people think there are better tools out there, let's give them a shot too.

Ok, have a great weekend.

Si

David Welton wrote:

 2.  The bigger issue is the flow of the UI - how screens relate to each
other, and how tasks can be performed.  Some of the screens are very data
model-centric.  While such screens could be useful, users typically complain
of having to go to too many screens (sometimes across applications) to do
the same thing.
    

+1

When I showed my boss the order process to order from a supplier, it
seemed like a very long chain of events.  His conclusion was that
OFBiz was not used by anyone doing a large volume of business because
going through all that clicking for every supplier order is not a
feasible proposition.

(I think that OFBiz' superior data model and architecture means that
adding higher-throughput order processing should be easy, but that's
another thread...)

  

 Taking it even a step further, let's say that OFBiz's real strengths are
the data model, the business logic, and the modular architecture.  Ok, so
then what's the best tool for building great UI, and why don't we integrate
it into OFBiz or build a separate UI for OFBIZ with it?  I don't think
Struts, JSP with Tiles, webmacro, or velocity would necessarily be that
different from what we have now.  But should we be looking at Ruby or PHP +
OFBiz?  Java portlets, so we could use a portal server (like
www.liferay.com, which happens to be MIT PL)?  Let's think outside the box
here...
    

Ruby on Rails is really cool, and I'd heartily encourage everyone to
take a look at it.  However, I don't think the problem is the tools,
really, it's just a matter of getting the right people to look at and
work with the application look, feel and flow.

The right people may very well be individuals who do not have
experience with the data model - it's easy to get too close to an
application's internals so that it's difficult to look at it with
'fresh' eyes.

Also, if I may venture a few thoughts... there are some people who are
more data oriented than visually oriented ( www.dedasys.com for
instance, doesn't run much risk of winning a beauty contest:-).  I've
noticed that both www.ofbiz.org as well as the OFBiz apps themselves
have a similar text-heavy look.  Compare with these guys, the latest
in trendy, web2.0 fad applications: http://www.37signals.com/

Of course, OFBiz attempts to do much more complex things than they do,
but just a dash of that sort of design might liven things up some.

  

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[Daniel Kunkel]

Hi

I've been out of the loop for a little while...  First, I just have to
say I love seeing the community working and sharing so well.

In the spirit of brainstorming, I'd like to share a vision I have of
what I think OFBiz could become.

Imagine a web application development environment that makes creating
the end web application easy... even for the semi-technical business
manager.  Say a Eclipse tool that's as easy to use as visual basic that
designs web applications. The designer could visually link the user
interface elements to various data entities, services, behaviors (java
functions for example) and other pages. Extra points if we can make it
using Ajax or Laszlo so the user interface can be truly dynamic.

Then, I would like to see us use this application to recreate the whole
OFBiz UI.

I know this sounds pie in the sky, but OFBiz already expertly handles
the business logic and data layers, and the widget tools would be a
shoe-in.

Once this system was working companies large and small could use it to
easily create their own web based applications customized for their
particular way of doing business.

Does this spark any ideas?

Thanks

--
Daniel

*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-
Have a GREAT Day!

Daniel Kunkel           [hidden email]
BioWaves, LLC           http://www.BioWaves.com
14150 NE 20th St. Suite F1
Bellevue, WA 98007
800-734-3588    425-895-0050
http://www.Apartment-Pets.com  http://www.Focus-Illusion.com
http://www.Brain-Fun.com       http://www.ColorGlasses.com
*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users