3 ms·

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'l

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 technically functional and easy to understand, but not exactly effortless or convenient to use. In particular, there's quite a jarring difference between the modes during switch, making comparison impossible. An inline UI next to/within the content, with some logic to ensure the nearest content to the control stays at the same scroll-position during change would help a lot with this. e.g. Expounder (linked in a sibling comment) looks to be a much nicer UI implementation from my quick glance at it.

kaycebasques 8y ago
> The UI as it stands is technically functional and easy to understand, but not exactly effortless or convenient to use. In particular, there's quite a jarring difference between the modes during switch, making comparison impossible. Agreed about the jarringness. I actually had a section about how jarring it felt (I'm the author of the blog post) but scrapped it because I was spending too much time on the post :D > An inline UI next to/within the content, with some logic to ensure the nearest content to the control stays at the same scroll-position during change would help a lot with this. Cool ideas. I initially wrote off the UI idea as low ROI (as you can see in the post) but maybe my opinion would change if I saw someone really nail this feature. Also, the low ROI comment only applies if we have to manually markup the content. If we can automate that side of it, then that changes the ROI equation.
laurentb 8y ago
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 the first place.
- kaycebasques 8y ago
  Thanks for the input. Any links? I'd like to learn more about these strategies.

kaycebasques 8y ago

> The UI as it stands is technically functional and easy to understand, but not exactly effortless or convenient to use. In particular, there's quite a jarring difference between the modes during switch, making comparison impossible. Agreed about the jarringness. I actually had a section about how jarring it felt (I'm the author of the blog post) but scrapped it because I was spending too much time on the post :D > An inline UI next to/within the content, with some logic to ensure the nearest content to the control stays at the same scroll-position during change would help a lot with this. Cool ideas. I initially wrote off the UI idea as low ROI (as you can see in the post) but maybe my opinion would change if I saw someone really nail this feature. Also, the low ROI comment only applies if we have to manually markup the content. If we can automate that side of it, then that changes the ROI equation.

laurentb 8y ago

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 the first place.

kaycebasques 8y ago
Thanks for the input. Any links? I'd like to learn more about these strategies.