Xref: utzoo comp.cog-eng:644 comp.software-eng:828 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-sdd!nick From: nick@hp-sdd.hp.com (Nick Flor) Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: OPEN LOOK Message-ID: <1508@hp-sdd.HP.COM> Date: 19 Sep 88 19:28:01 GMT References: <7099@well.UUCP> Sender: netnews@hp-sdd.HP.COM Reply-To: nick@hp-sdd.hp.com.UUCP (Nick Flor) Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Lines: 25 In article <7099@well.UUCP> shf@well.UUCP (Stuart H. Ferguson) writes: > >While this valid in principle, and OPEN LOOK does provide some good >guidelines to work from, it goes too far in specifying exactly what the >interface must look like. > What's wrong with this? My feeling is that if the interface specification is based on what has been proven to be an effective means of conveying the functional characteristics of the icons, then why not specify it exactly? Too much freedom of expression for programmers leads to confusion with the users. Nick 'Newton said: "if I have seen further than other men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants". The problem with programming, though, is that everyone's stepping on each others toes.' -- (can't remember who originally said this) -- + Disclaimer: The above opinions are my own, not necessarily my employer's. + + Oh, sure. Sure. I'm going. But I got | Nick V. Flor * * o * * + + your number, see? And one of these | Hewlett Packard SDD * * /I\ * * + + days, the joke's gonna be on you. | ..hplabs!hp-sdd!nick * * / \ * * +