Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Independent Human Interface Guidelines

Posted by kdawson on from the because-somebody-has-to dept.

An anonymous reader alerts us to the IndieHIG Wiki, which is an independent effort to pick up the ball that Apple has dropped on human interface guidelines (can you spell FTFF?). From the wiki: "The IndieHIG project is an initiative created out of the necessity to document the new look and feel aspects of the Mac OS X experience, outside of the supervision of Apple itself. The project is not intended to replace, but rather to supplement the somewhat dated Apple Human Interface Guidelines (HIG). There are many instances of Apple using new and experimental interface styles, spurring developers to emulate these styles in their own applications. Unfortunately, because Apple provides neither guidelines nor code for developers to work with, the implementation of these interface styles and features by third parties can be lopsided and directionless. The IndieHIG intends to change this by providing a comprehensive set of guidelines governing the use and appearance of new, undocumented interface elements so that their implementation by third party developers adheres to the unwritten standards that Apple has set."

6 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. UI standards wouldn't hurt by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As in the auto industry, placement of standard controls in the user interface make everyone comfortable enough with the technology to promote universal usage. How they connect, their feel etc. leaves everyone a bit of leeway to play with the design, but there are those first moments when you immerse yourself into a technology where you neither want nor need to think about how to begin. The initial controls should be familiar to all.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  2. Dumb mistake, Apple by Spunkemeyer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would they let the Human Interface Guidelines langush? The consistency of the experience in using a Mac is a big plus. But, given the number of inconsistencies that have crept into OSX the past few versions, it's completely obvious to see it hasn't been a priority to them.

    1. Re:Dumb mistake, Apple by RustNeverSleeps · · Score: 5, Informative
      No, actually this behavior is not new to the latest version of iPhoto and it is specifically covered in Apples (now dated) Human Interface Guidelines. Quoting from the HIG:

      "In most cases, applications that are not document-based should quit when the main window is closed. For Example, System Preferences quits if the user closes the window. If an application continues to perform some function when the main window is closed, however, it may be appropriate to leave it running when the main window is closed. For example, iTunes continues to play when the user closes the main window." As iPhoto is not document based nor does it do anything with the main window closed, it should (and does) quit when you close the main window. That said, I agree that there are some inconsistencies that Apple should fix in OS X and Apple first-party applications, just that the example you gave is not one of them.
  3. Giddyup! by jddj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Human Interface Guidelines have been languishing for far too long at Apple (basically since OS 9 if not a little before).

    This is sorely needed for the OS X platform, and Microsoft, all of the Linux Manager projects and the web as a whole could stand to take a few notes.

  4. Re:Maybe KDE & Gnome Folk Will Read... by mushadv · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you think this colour looks like poop, you should visit your optometrist.

    Or your proctologist.

  5. Re:Microsoft's User Interface Guidelines by AaronBrethorst · · Score: 5, Informative

    You mean these guidelines?. They pretty easy to find; searching for "Vista Ux Guidelines" will do the trick for you.

    --
    No, but I used to work for Microsoft.