Hi All,
First of all I'd like to say thanks for the opportunity to provide feedback
on the look and feel of GeoNetwork's future interface. I have had about 10
years experience in internet spatial systems and presentation of the results
and have seen information from many user requirement surveys on similar
systems. Hence I feel that I can contribute feedback about the mock-ups and
here are my comments:
1. I like the presentation of the results in the home page. I have a basic
view in my mind that presents the majority of information in the home page's
frames and only the details that can't fit into these frames are presented in
a pop up window. This provides the user with a consistent presentation
format.
2. The simple search seems to provide the option of a spatial search. This
is not as simple as a plain text search on "anywhere" in the metadata record.
I envisage many people wanting to perform simple plain text searches without
spatial restrictions.
Hence I think that the spatial search should be removed from the simple
search option.
3. I like the map in the advanced search. It would allow people to select an
area of interest by dragging a bounding box on the map.
4. I would like the same map to be a Web Map Client for the presentation of
WMS layers of the interactive maps. I think that people would want to add to
the existing map any WMS that they wish to view. In this way they are not
sent off to another window and another map.
5. I don't see the option of choosing the hierarchLevelName for the advanced
search. I expect that people would like to multi-select the type of resource
that they wish to search for. For example, we intend on creating metadata
for all our software. This metadata would have a hierarchyLevelName of
"software". Our software developers are likely to want to only search for
metadata about "software" rather than all the different resource types.
Similarly with "collectionHardware", "dataset", "featureTypes", etc. etc.
I would like the hierarchyLevelName to be a search criteria in the advanced
search.
6. I liked the old format where there were "Categories" in the lower right
hand frame. We expected to use this to display the metadata in the
information frame and to present in a pop up window the decision support
systems (specific Web Feature Clients) that GeoNetwork may not be able to
present. We would expect GeoNetwork to be able to present and overlay WMS
images in the Web Map Client (as in 4. above) and present the results from
GetInfo in the information frame (bottom left hand frame in the old
interface).
If the Web Map Client of GeoNetwork can't manage the specific application
requirements of a WFC then that WFC application can open up in another window
with the relevant metadata presented in the information frame.
7. I like the idea that the search and WMC components are not replaced by the
presentation of the search results. I don't know how the full metadata
record would be displayed but I would like them to open up another window and
present the content after selecting the "Metadata" "button" or better still,
the hypertext link used for the metadata title. I much prefer the home page
to not be replaced. This will maintain consistency as well as allow the
presentation of WMS if so desired by the user when they select the
"Interactive Map" button.
8. Replacing the "Interactive Map" button as a checkbox would allow the WMS
from many layers be presented in the WMC. This allows the user to see not
only the metadata but also an image of the data on one map. This will
provide a useful resource to the majority of interested users. E.G. Maps for
School Projects and overlaying different layers to create a map for bush
walking, camping, travelling, property rights in my back yard, etc.) It is
usually not necessary for the actual data to be returned, just images.
9. Finally the "Download" button should pop up another window to a licence
agreement or another interface to download the data. The home page should
not be replaced by the download interface. If at all possible the download
interface and other interfaces should be presented in the "information"
frame.
In summary I like the home page to be the major presentation of information.
There should be a WMC frame that can be used to define a search region, the
search frame, the "information" frame and the "other relevant information"
frame (previously called the "Categories" frame). If these frames are not
large enough to present relevant results from the search etc. then a pop up
window should be used. The home page should *not* be replaced.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment. I look forward to the new development
of GeoNetwork.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
[mailto:geonetwork-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] On
Behalf Of Jeroen Ticheler
Sent: Saturday, 30 September 2006 1:08 AM
To: Geonetwork-devel; geonetwork-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [GeoNetwork-devel] Some mock-upsHi all,
Here are some mock ups for future Geonetwork releases (not
sure if we
get this done in the 2.1 release)
http://geonetwork-opensource.org/img/mock-up
Looking forward to comments.
Ciao,
Jeroen--------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the
chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and
earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
GeoNetwork-devel mailing list
GeoNetwork-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geonetwork-devel
GeoNetwork OpenSource is maintained at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/geonetwork