[UI]New photo manager mockup. Embedder opinions needed.
|
FlamingFoo
Joined: 2005-03-09
Posts: 14 |
Posted: Sun, 2005-03-13 09:10
|
|
Currently, G2 photo management is not as comfortable as it should be. We got separate pages for making links, deletion and moving, instead of a single common one. There is no easy way to see contents of target album, and how does the moved photo fit there. When deciding whether a particular photo deserved being moved/linked/deleted, you see no information about it other then name and tiny thumb - no size, no date, no description. |
|
Posts: 239
Essentially what we are trying to get, is an opinion of the users and site admins of embedded, and non-embedded G2 sites (or future sites).
What we would like to know is how do you feel if G2 "broke out" of either G2's layout/theme or if embedded, the CMSs layout/theme for complex screens. (ie: Edit/Delete/Move all items in an entire album).
What this means, is that the page might not (probably won't) look like the rest of your page. We could probably include a banner or something at the top though. The page would essentially look like: this (click here).
Please state your concerns, comments, and opinions here - you will help decide the future of this project (as you usually do, if you know it or not!). We appreciate the time you take to help us.
Thanks!
Posts: 32509
volksport, this has quite nothing to do with embedded/integrated G2. if you want a two blocks side by side each with vertical scrollbars, you can accomplish this without frames/... . make it a little smaller, add the menu on the top and the left side, and it's usable.
disclaimer: i didn't use the existing link/move GUI, don't know if this norton commander inspired one is better.
Posts: 14
Unfortunately, it would not work. Lets start with column height. It is quite possible that left sidebar will make the page longer then one screen. If this happens, we got trouble - there are now TWO scrollbars that affect position of view inside column - one from page and one from subframe. Another issue is that sidebars eat away width, and if the "regular" CMS-generated page has fixed width, there is just no space to do any effective work. Have a look at care2 - if the manager had to be done within the normal page context, we are down to 1/3 of width, and got headers to chew away the height.
Posts: 32509
the space within http://www.care2.com/c2c/photos/view.html/view/707263563/Family_Photos/?g2_GALLERYSID=83e6d474f9dd91415c4eb038f12b5ce1
doesn't seem so small.
Posts: 14
Still less then half of my screen. If manager was a separate window, we could have it all
.
Posts: 32509
separate window like a popup??
Posts: 14
Yes, a full screen new window.
Posts: 32509
aren't popups from hell?
i'm sure others will have better arguments, but the only advantage of a popup is to escape the restrictions made by a template. on the other side, popups confuse the user and introduce a new class of GUI problems and browser (in-)compatibilities.
and someone like care2 would probably make the popup as small as the original template.
what professional/commercial sites actually use popups for anything else than ads? amazon, ebay, ...?
Posts: 8601
of course, if the functionality in the popup is 10x easier than the current item admin functions then people may not mind.. make this a module and people can choose..
Posts: 14
They might be. However, here I am aiming for a simle <a href="http://whatever" target="_blank">Manage photos</a>. All reasonable popup blockers will allow this to go through.
Escaping from template is exactly what I am trying to do. I expect all those sidebars and irrelevant CMS dingbats to be in the way when you need to shuffle photos between two 50-100 image albums. Or I am wrong, and I should aim for smaller album sizes?
Good quesion. However, it needs to be made somewhat more specific.
"What kind of UI do high profile sites use to allow user to manage extensive amounts of visually-oriented data?" Does someone know a management tool from a high-profile site that serves similar purpose?