Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CWRC Writer Redesing #275

Open
lucaju opened this issue Jun 26, 2020 · 16 comments
Open

CWRC Writer Redesing #275

lucaju opened this issue Jun 26, 2020 · 16 comments
Assignees
Labels
CWRC-Writer 2020 CWRC-Writer redo, scheduled for 2020-2021

Comments

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor

lucaju commented Jun 26, 2020

This thread is dedicated to discussing the CWRC Writer design refresh.

After a few years of development, CWRC Writer has expanded in capability, introduce tons of features and functionalities, improve interoperability, and give support to a variety of different use cases. However, the overall look and feel kept the same face. It is time to reimagine CWRC Writer's interface to improve user experience and give a refreshing look to the project. However, we can't change the frontend without reworking the code using the latest web technologies and frameworks. So, this redesign is not just a facelift, but a completely new version of the code, from the backend to the frontend.

Under the surface, we decided that we will adopt React and Overmind (a better alternative to Redux) to rebuild the code. To build a new GUI, we choose to work with Material-UI to replace three different frameworks the project currently uses. Material-UI is backed by Google's Material Design Principles made exclusive for digital materials. A thorough overhaul wouldn't be complete without updating the base dependency of this project: TinyMCE 5.

Over the last few weeks, I have been working in a series of sketches reimagining each aspect of CWRC Writer front end and user experience. These sketches were made using Adobe XD, and the first mockup can be accessed here: http://labs.fluxo.art.br/cwrc/#/

Or you can see each screen as a PNG (check the zip file). https://app.zenhub.com/files/82123127/60532662-3e67-43da-a20e-c471a6218618/download

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jun 26, 2020

One important aspect we should take into consideration is the icons and colours assigned to each entity. These are the set of icons and colours we chose. Feedback is welcome.

icons

colours

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

SusanBrown commented Jun 28, 2020

Thanks for sharing this, Luciano. May reply bit by bit.

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

The icons are great. Not sure about the entity one though. I can see pros and cons but it looks like a bulleted list. I think an icon that suggest linked data would be better. E.g. this one from mindmap, suggesting a central node (the document) and related entities.
image

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

I see that what you have for merge is similar though. What about something like this for merge?
image

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

Context menu: love the tags. Are Remove entity / Convert to entity no longer needed?

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

Is the LOD button for showing or hiding the RDF in the XML viewer? Might we want to use the RDF logo instead?
image

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

The menu bar icons look great.

I imagine a lot of work has gone into the colours in terms of differentiation, colour blindness etc. Could you confirm? If so, then I hesitate to suggest much, and I think my general tendency towards a more muted palette is probably out of line given the need to differentiate so many things and have them work on two different backgrounds. However, I will mention that I find the red very intense, and wonder about taking it a bit in the direction of ruby or cabernet.

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jun 29, 2020

I liked the icons you suggested. I think the 'mindmap' icon reflects better what the entities means (linked data), as opposed to representing how they look like on the interface (an ordered list).

It is not too similar to merge. I think the merge can still have the current form.

I was unsure about the icon for RDF. Perhaps because I don't know if RDF and JSON-LD are the same things. For sure the icon is better than just LOD.

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jun 29, 2020

There are some assumptions in relation to the menu bar (ribbon) and the way the document is showed up. I have to investigate TinyMCE to see what is possible. I'm considering rendering the ribbon outside of TinyMCE to have more control over them. Currently, the buttons and their actions are passed to TinyMCE, which in turn configure and render them. The page break effect might be possible from withing TinyMCE, but I must study the API to be sure.

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jun 29, 2020

The colour palette is still open to discussion.
Currently, we have to differentiate 11 types of entities. They don't have (and perhaps don't need to have) a "natural" connection to the entities. But it is pretty difficult to have 11 distinct colours that don't share similarities between them. On top of that, some colours are not very suitable for the job (like bright yellow, white, or black).

The current palette was chosen using a collection of options I generated using 3 different web apps. Mihaela helped to fine-tune them, but we might need to run some user testing to double-check if they work well.

It would be beautiful if these colours work well in light and dark themes to avoid introducing colour mismatch between the two. But if the dark theme is not something we don't want to pursue, we can just drop this part of the conversation.

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

SusanBrown commented Jul 15, 2020 via email

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jul 15, 2020

Great.
I changed the icons for the "entities" menu.
Also, I added to the design of how "notes" will be displayed in the text. Image attached.
Screen Shot 2020-07-15 at 11 50 07 AM

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jul 15, 2020

I guess the next step is to plan how to implement this new design. I've been talking with @ilovan about this.
I want first to map CWRC Writer's functionalities to figure out how to build the structure: how to split the code into modules and repos to keep the modularity and flexibility it has already.

I also want to dig a little deeper into TinyMCE documentation to see if I can predict if and where things will break. This way I can try to plan ahead during the development.

@SusanBrown
Copy link
Contributor

SusanBrown commented Jul 16, 2020 via email

@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Jul 16, 2020

Oh yes, for sure.
Screen Shot 2020-07-16 at 11.45.26 AM.png

@lucaju lucaju added the CWRC-Writer 2020 CWRC-Writer redo, scheduled for 2020-2021 label Aug 5, 2020
@lucaju
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucaju commented Mar 29, 2022

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CWRC-Writer 2020 CWRC-Writer redo, scheduled for 2020-2021
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants