4 ms·

But if you use a specification language, then how can you build a pixel-perfect, unique set of sliders that’s subtly different from everyone else’s?

pc86 3y ago
IME the real "problem" (maybe just interpersonally) is when you have a product person, or a designer, who insists that something needs to be pixel-perfect and subtly different when it objectively does not. Maybe even when it is a grey area but the juice isn't worth the squeeze. Case in point I'm in the middle of, let's just call it what it is, an argument, because a new page in a new section of our app has a different design for form elements, specifically single check boxes (think TOS, affirmations, etc). Well we have shared components obviously, so we're reusing the component. No sense taking half a day or more to reskin this one checkbox on one page. The amount of grief and manhours wasted discussing this checkbox would astound you. Thousands of dollars in payroll over multiple meetings so far with no end in sight because this particular check box just has to be slightly different. The ticket which has been feature-complete for over a week has no chance of being merged in November.
- jprete 3y ago
  The usability article [1] from yesterday suggested a similar problem - design-oriented people want to put their graphical mark on their GUIs, and it comes at a significant usability cost. GUIs are most usable when they are consistent - everyone uses exactly the same UI elements, with the same exact color schemes and shapes and sizes, to mean the same things every time. And that’s…not what people do anymore. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38280201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38280201
  - tsunamifury 3y ago
    Dear god another “engineers don’t get the difference between design and ux and complain that everything should just all be the same” thread.
- fidotron 3y ago
  I swear the art form here is to provide the product people and designers with a tool/framework where they make the choices and they suffer the constraints, then they have to blame themselves when they can't do it. There is the old story about Steve Jobs and the Mac calculator app, where they made a calculator toolbox to build one in order to prevent him demanding seemingly arbitrary changes all the time. https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Calculator_Construction_Set.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Calculator_Const...
  - lanstin 3y ago
    Exactly. Look not at the requirements but at the likely space for requirements over time and build an engine that can be tuned/tweaked/configed to meet all the likely requirements. Makes testing a little harder but makes dev and product happy.
coldtea 3y ago
Hook the resulting GUI code up to customizable styling?

pc86 3y ago

IME the real "problem" (maybe just interpersonally) is when you have a product person, or a designer, who insists that something needs to be pixel-perfect and subtly different when it objectively does not. Maybe even when it is a grey area but the juice isn't worth the squeeze. Case in point I'm in the middle of, let's just call it what it is, an argument, because a new page in a new section of our app has a different design for form elements, specifically single check boxes (think TOS, affirmations, etc). Well we have shared components obviously, so we're reusing the component. No sense taking half a day or more to reskin this one checkbox on one page. The amount of grief and manhours wasted discussing this checkbox would astound you. Thousands of dollars in payroll over multiple meetings so far with no end in sight because this particular check box just has to be slightly different. The ticket which has been feature-complete for over a week has no chance of being merged in November.

jprete 3y ago
The usability article [1] from yesterday suggested a similar problem - design-oriented people want to put their graphical mark on their GUIs, and it comes at a significant usability cost. GUIs are most usable when they are consistent - everyone uses exactly the same UI elements, with the same exact color schemes and shapes and sizes, to mean the same things every time. And that’s…not what people do anymore. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38280201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38280201
- tsunamifury 3y ago
  Dear god another “engineers don’t get the difference between design and ux and complain that everything should just all be the same” thread.
fidotron 3y ago
I swear the art form here is to provide the product people and designers with a tool/framework where they make the choices and they suffer the constraints, then they have to blame themselves when they can't do it. There is the old story about Steve Jobs and the Mac calculator app, where they made a calculator toolbox to build one in order to prevent him demanding seemingly arbitrary changes all the time. https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Calculator_Construction_Set.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Calculator_Const...
- lanstin 3y ago
  Exactly. Look not at the requirements but at the likely space for requirements over time and build an engine that can be tuned/tweaked/configed to meet all the likely requirements. Makes testing a little harder but makes dev and product happy.

coldtea 3y ago

Hook the resulting GUI code up to customizable styling?