A Suggestion for design pattern format in the DPL

Daphne Ogle daphne at media.berkeley.edu
Sat Jul 5 08:19:54 UTC 2008

This looks good.

One section we should include is "design suggestions for integrating  
the component".  We've got this section in the Uploader and it seems  
clear from discussions at the conference that this valuable  
information to include in all our design patterns.  It's quite unique  
to our Fluid situation so we don't see it in other patterns formats.


On Jul 4, 2008, at 4:57 PM, erin yu wrote:

> Hi, I just realized my email below didn't go through to the list.
> Thanks Allison for letting me know.
> Here's my original email.
> Jon and I have recently worked on the Inline Edit and Pager design
> patterns. Being new to authoring design patterns, we thought about
> what topics/sections should be included in a design pattern, what
> each of these should talk about, what other pattern libraries have,
> etc.
> Based on our discussion, we came up with a suggestion for a slightly
> modified format for our design patterns and would like your feedback.
> No big changes have been made - we just wanted to reduce
> redundancies and clarify exactly what should be discussed in each
> section so it's easier for the authors and readers.
> [Title]
> The title of the pattern and optionally the alternative names of the
> pattern (what the other pattern libraries call it)
> Problem
> "What the problem is this pattern trying to solve?"
> Use When
> "When you encounter these situations, use the pattern."
> Describe the characteristics of the situations then the pattern
> should be used to help the integrator determine whether they should
> use the pattern
> Solution
> "So when you have the situation above, here's what you do."
> Briefly describe the solution along with some screenshots, so people
> can see what you're talking about at a glance.
> How
> Explain the solution in detail. What interactions should happen. How
> the system provides/responds to the user's needs/actions.
> Rationale
> This section is currently called "Why" and placed right after the
> Use When section. Because of its placement, it wasn't immediately
> clear as to what it was about. Also I found there are a bit of
> redundancy between the Why and Use When sections.
> Instead, it would make more sense to explain the solution first,
> then explain why the solution is the way it is, provide reasons
> behind the design decisions made, provide Rationale! ... and hence
> call the section Rationale.
> Accessibility
> Recommendations on keyboard interaction, text to be read out by
> screen readers, etc.
> Examples
> Links to other web pages where a similar design is used.
> Related Fluid Components
> Link to the overview page of the related components
> -Erin
> _______________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list
> fluid-work at fluidproject.org
> http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

Daphne Ogle
Senior Interaction Designer
University of California, Berkeley
Educational Technology Services
daphne at media.berkeley.edu
cell (510)847-0308

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://fluidproject.org/pipermail/fluid-talk/attachments/20080705/83401275/attachment.html>

More information about the fluid-talk mailing list