Show HN: A UI That Lets Readers Control How Much Information They See

Post by Bjartr » Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 8:31 PM UTC

blattimwind wrote: post #12

duxup wrote: post #11

I really like this in concept. There's times when I hit a site and I'm just there to do one of maybe three common things, but it's sort of "hidden" in a jumbled site. Granted this is all about data on screen but I would think you could extend it to common actions or such. Maybe you'd also learn that all your users really just use or want a simple view rather than a more complex site?

I've seen a network configuration tool that had a drop down in the application header where you could choose between "Simple", "Advanced" and "Expert"; each presented largely different user interfaces, which were actually quite good. E.g. with "Simple" there simply was a list of Wi-Fi networks and a wizard for creating new ones or changing them with basically three options: SSID, password and whether it's a guest net…

Post by stevenwliao » Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 8:36 PM UTC

kaycebasques wrote: post #48

stevenwliao wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Axios also puts this to great use with a "go deeper" button. It's very helpful for deciding how much of each story to consume. Screenshot: https://i.postimg.cc/SKkKc85H/Screen-Shot-2018-12-10-at-11-5... Site: https://www.axios.com/technology

Thanks, I'll add to the "prior work" section. On one hand, forcing users to click a button to see content is kind-of user-hostile, IMO. It's appropriate for a homepage, though. I don't like it when a homepage shows the full content of each post because it forces me to do a lot of scrolling if I'm not interested in a post. So my first impression is that Axios is doing it well and thoughtfully. But on the other hand, t…

Post by kaycebasques » Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 9:11 PM UTC

laurentb wrote: post #50

lucideer wrote: post #21

From the article: > My initial impression is that the ROI does not justify the effort. > It depends on how strongly users respond to the feature, because it'll create a noticeable amount of work for writers. The author is probably correct about the ROI not justifying the effort, but I think UI design should also be considered as an input for whether users would respond to the feature. The UI as it stands is technical…

erm, commenting on the ROI bit, but in Journalism AFAIK (or at least writing articles and so on) there are concepts of how a title/ sub-heading / article should be written to give the maximum amount of info based on its "part" (if i make myself clear in that a title/sub-heading/article is a part of an article). in that sense, writing with this in mind makes the ROI pretty obvious, since it's being written already in…

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 9:12 PM UTC

shaki-dora wrote: post #49

Journalism already has a mechanism for this. In a news story (as opposed to longer, narrative stories), the important news is up top, followed by background in order of importance. The interface thus becomes: stop reading when it stops being new or interesting.

Post by kaycebasques » Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 9:16 PM UTC

basch wrote: post #47

kaycebasques wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I'll add to the "prior work" section.

Mercury Reader (formerly readability) https://mercury.postlight.com/reader/ and Slashdot both belong as prior art. Slashdot has had the ability to change length of comments for a long time.