181–190 of 414 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even with nesting you still need for/id attributes to make it accessible to common voice command software: https://www.tpgi.com/should-form-labels-be-wrapped-or-separa...
That’s the voice control software’s problem.
This is so lost in Agile. Engineers should get the time to “sand” their products, but we just don’t. If QA doesn’t make a ticket for the space between, it’ll never get fixed. The customer probably notices this kind of a thing but it’s a miracle if the customer bothers to report it, and another miracle if it eventually turns into a ticket, and another miracle if someone prioritises it enough to spend time fixing it. […
What does agile have to do with anything? You think waterfall explicitly provided time to test out the UI and "sand" it? This is a process that generally requires a product manager to choose to prioritize, together with a capable UX engineer and/or designer. That prioritization can be inserted into any development methodology if you want it. Agile is irrelevant here.
Window dressing in the virtual space! Spending too much time/effort worrying about this nears sabotage, IMO
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s the voice control software’s problem.
At the end of the day it’s your users’ problem. Ideally their assistive tech would work, but if it doesn’t and you’ve got an easy fix then you should implement that fix.
If your software works and is designed as intended, then sometimes it stays the users problem. Unfortunate, but otherwise problems will stay forever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree with the first two, the third is a problem. Yes, you can always extend your program, but should you? The more code and functionality you include, the harder it becomes to maintain. Finding the point where your software is so round or complete that you can call it done is somewhat of an art. You can undoubtedly add stuff beyond that point, but I won't improve the software in the long term.
Quite the opposite - a design (in general, not just software) isn't done until you can't take anything else away from it. I've coined the term Bonsai Software here before, but I do like the sanding analogy. In the last week I've spent way more leisure time than could be considered sensible writing some user-interface code for the Amiga, in order to make defining the UI in future projects as simple and elegant as poss…
There is a high chance of overshooting the optimal design, and then you have to reverse direction.
I wonder what’s the most polished or “sanded” UI out there? You would think FAANG would have a half decent UI and UX with the amount of money they have. But anybody that has used Amazon.com or AWS, GCP, or even Azure would beg to differ. Personally, off the top of my head. The most polished UI/UX has to be “mcmaster.com”. I can find anything I need in what seems like a couple minutes. Compare this to big box stores l…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does agile have to do with anything? You think waterfall explicitly provided time to test out the UI and "sand" it? This is a process that generally requires a product manager to choose to prioritize, together with a capable UX engineer and/or designer. That prioritization can be inserted into any development methodology if you want it. Agile is irrelevant here.
"Waterfall" is not a development process. But plenty of the processes that give space for planning, also give space for QA. So surely agile, in the broad sense of development processes, is relevant to the comparison.
This is so lost in Agile. Engineers should get the time to “sand” their products, but we just don’t. If QA doesn’t make a ticket for the space between, it’ll never get fixed. The customer probably notices this kind of a thing but it’s a miracle if the customer bothers to report it, and another miracle if it eventually turns into a ticket, and another miracle if someone prioritises it enough to spend time fixing it. […
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does agile have to do with anything? You think waterfall explicitly provided time to test out the UI and "sand" it? This is a process that generally requires a product manager to choose to prioritize, together with a capable UX engineer and/or designer. That prioritization can be inserted into any development methodology if you want it. Agile is irrelevant here.
It's just a general romanticization of how programmers work: if we have more time we'll fix everything. No we don't.
I wonder what’s the most polished or “sanded” UI out there? You would think FAANG would have a half decent UI and UX with the amount of money they have. But anybody that has used Amazon.com or AWS, GCP, or even Azure would beg to differ. Personally, off the top of my head. The most polished UI/UX has to be “mcmaster.com”. I can find anything I need in what seems like a couple minutes. Compare this to big box stores l…
I wonder what’s the most polished or “sanded” UI out there? Windows 2000. Everything newer has been slowly downhill.