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  * * / \ * *   +