Mark:

I did not make any assumptions about intent or motivations on the behalf
of anyone at Canonical.

What I am saying is that maybe...just maybe the Canonical design team
isn't communicating enough about intent and motivation so that the
external community can see individual changes in context of the long
term vision. I've sketched what the consequences of a lack of
communication can look like...but I've not spoken to what I think
Canonical's motivations are in failing to layout a bright roadmap for
externals to use to put changes into the correct context. But man, I'm
so hoping its revenue generating Google Adwords in window
titlebars...but I haven't actually said that yet.

What I am suggesting is that there is a lack of communication from the
Canonical design team outward into the larger community.  Did I at any
point question the fact that Canonical cares about usability and design?
I know very well Canonical sponsored the Gnome event. But sponsoring a
small team event, is not the same as communicating the vision created in
that event. I saw a lot of people making an effort to really communicate
a larger vision of what is going on in an effort to prepare the wider
community for the UI changes that are going to result of that peer-
expert meeting. And because of that effort to communicate, its going to
be much easier for externals to understand how each individual change
fits into a broader context.  Did any of the Canonical participants at
that Gnome hackfest blog or any other way communicate their experience
of the Gnome hackfest? Sure Canonical sponsored it...but did any of the
Canonical attendees "communicate" to the wider Gnome community outside
that room?  Its effort to communicate expert opinion to non-experts that
aids in the acceptance of the larger vision...not the simple fact that
the experts are in fact experts.

What I am suggesting is that you and your team need to be mindful of a
pattern of behavior that disregards the power of external proactive
communication to set the context of a discussion over individual
changes.  I'm not speaking to what is motivating that pattern of
behavior, what's motivating the lack of discussion about the benefits
opening up the right side of the titlebar.  I'm just pointing out its a
deficiency in your communication strategy in that you haven't laid down
a roadmap where this change makes sense in context. If individual design
decisions continue on like this, communication is going to become more
shrill which each such change.

-- 
[light-theme] please revert the order of the window controls back to 
"menu:minimize,maximize,close"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/532633
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to