Re: [Gnumed-devel] Measurements selection, formatting, behaviour

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 01:28:23PM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

>>> It seems to me it would help greatly to relocate the reference
>>> information rows to place them immediately under the Date despite  
>>> that
>>> the Comment would then be moved down as the bottom row of this  
>>> cluster.
>>> We would thus get rid of the label "reference information"...
>>
>> I don't think so. I think it is useful to have the mandatory
>> fields up top.
>
> There is no practice or requirement to always put the mandatory rows  
> together.

No requirement and not always, that much is true. However,
it is good practice.

> Information should be positioned in the way that makes the most sense.

Ah, but that's too unspecific. There's at least two ways in
which information is visible (in fact, it could be argued
that the first way isn't dealing with information yet but
rather with data):

1) data entry
2) information display

During data entry it is well advised to group entry fields
in blocks such that one can see at a glance whether the mask
has been filled in appropriately. A close second
consideration is then to regroup them by semantics.

Information display is another matter - here different
designs serve different information needs. I would certainly
argue that the information tooltip needs a layout much
different from the data entry widget.

> Otherwise, note if we would follow this argument through, that in
>
>       Adding new measurement
>
> you should have to move what is currently "Comment" downward
> - likewise change field sequences in "new patient creation" and "attach 
> documents"

Well, yeah, there's a need to strike a balance between
religiously following any one concept and making things feel
right.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346