- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:34:01 +0000
Sander Tekelenburg wrote: > Letting each and every content provider decide on the UI for their > content just creates usablity hell for end users. Agreed. It's astonishing how much effort goes into creating usability hell. > Content providers will likely want to provide their own UI, if only for 'branding'. So, for adoption > sake, it might be wise to allow this, but UAs would have to allows users to > override that in favour of the UA's built-in UI. Perhaps most content providers UIs will just be branding-bloated and user-hostile. But some will no doubt also incorporate additional functionality; it would be a shame to lose such innovations. I wonder if we should encourage UAs both to implement their own UI and faciliate adding functionality (/not/ branding or style though) to that UI. This isn't without precedent. Flash objects offer a standard context menu, but authors can add options to that menu. (I think they can also remove options, but from the user's point of view that's a bug.) I suspect the fact that JS can't add to the context menu in browser environments more generally is a shame. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Sunday, 18 March 2007 09:34:01 UTC