[ckan-discuss] CKAN UI improvements #1 - Package Page

[Richard Pope]

Updated version here taking in to considerations Richard's feedback:

http://ckan.org/wiki/UIRedesignPackage

- Merged the first two columns in the downloads table
- Moved the source link back to the top at original size, but kept url
shortening,  added 'source:' and lined up with title so hopefully
still clearer
- Changed the API section so it is the same light grey as tables
- I'm not 100% sold on 'collections' but will leave it in for now and
see if anything else comes up. Whatever it ends up as I think it needs
to explain that these things are essentially curated collections of
packages.

Unless anyone else has any major suggestions/alterations I'm going to
sign this bit off and move onto the next section.

cheers,

Richard

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard at cyganiak.de> wrote:
> Nice. I like where this is going!
>
> On 1 Dec 2010, at 13:45, Richard Pope wrote:
>>
>> Comments/discussion - I've changed the name to 'Questions and
>> comments' and added the number of items to the button.
>
> Works for me.
>
>> Downloads / resources - I've gone with 'Downloads and resources' as
>> the title, so as to accomodate  RDF etc, and added an explanation
>> under the table.
>
> I like the title, and the explanation helps. The table itself still doesn't
> make much sense -- it still labels everything as “Download” regardless of
> whether it's downloadable, and the URL column is still mislabelled (it
> doesn't contain URLs).
>
>> API / datapkg - I've added a visually obviously separate section for
>> code related stuff and included some examples for using datapkg.
>
> Looks much too big and heavy to me. Either put it on a separate tab (“API”),
> or collapse it by default, or make the block much smaller. I don't see the
> point in printing the full JSON and RDF URLs -- links would be sufficient.
>
> I'm glad that groups are back. I'm not a fan of renaming the feature to
> “Collections”, but I'm ok with it as long as that change is also made in the
> URL scheme and in the API.
>
> I still want the homepage URL back in a prominent position. “View more
> information at http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/...” in a small font misses the
> point. Look, some of us use CKAN *as a directory of links*, essentially a
> library of bookmarks. This URL is one of the most important pieces of
> information on the page, perhaps second only to the title.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard at cyganiak.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> Great to see work on the UI of CKAN happening!
>>>
>>> On 30 Nov 2010, at 13:44, Richard Pope wrote:
>>>>
>>>> First up here are a few suggestions and a mockup for the package page:
>>>>
>>>> http://ckan.org/wiki/UIRedesignPackage
>>>
>>> Nice!
>>>
>>> Some comments:
>>>
>>>> Comments - Suggest move to a separate tab and rename discussion as per
>>>> Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> Not sure about this. On Wikipedia, the discussion page is not for
>>> discussions about the topic of the article but about discussing the
>>> article
>>> itself. On CKAN, my impression is that comments about either of those are
>>> encouraged. Or not? And if the comments can contain useful information
>>> about
>>> the dataset (“it's full of errors and not actively maintained, don't
>>> waste
>>> your time with this”), then they shouldn't be hidden on a separate page.
>>>
>>> So I guess some clarity about the purpose of the comments field is needed
>>> first.
>>>
>>>> Getting the data - 'resources' is unclear term, just call it
>>>> 'downloads?'
>>>
>>> That would be a step in the wrong direction IMO. It's not just downloads
>>> but
>>> all sort of other things too -- API endpoints, documentation, example
>>> links.
>>> See [1] for a proposal that deals with this in a better way IMO -- by
>>> moving
>>> the description to the first column, it becomes much clearer what the
>>> resource is (download or something else).
>>>
>>>> Groups - Confusing having groups and tags on this page, suggest remove
>>>> groups for now focus on tags as primary method for organising /
>>>> grouping.
>>>
>>> Please don't do that. Groups don't have to be visually prominent, but you
>>> would make my job as the manager of a CKAN group MUCH harder by removing
>>> this information completely from the package page. I agree that tags are
>>> certainly much more important for the average user, and should be
>>> displayed
>>> more prominently.
>>>
>>>> Title - Name of package gets lot in the buttons (edit etc) and the
>>>> package
>>>> slug id
>>>
>>> The package ID shouldn't be as prominent as it currently is, but should
>>> still be shown somewhere to enable tools like datapkg where one needs to
>>> know the package ID.
>>>
>>>> API / package slug - Create new API section the explains the slug id and
>>>> how to access via datapkg etc
>>>
>>> Yes good idea. Don't call it “package slug” though!
>>>
>>> Please keep the package URL (homepage) more prominent. I'd vote for
>>> keeping
>>> it where it is now, under the big title. I often use CKAN as a sort of
>>> directory for going to the web pages of certain packages.
>>>
>>> +1 to the other points.
>>>
>>> Some other points that I would like to see addressed in a redesign of the
>>> package page UI:
>>> http://ckan.org/ticket/818
>>> http://ckan.org/ticket/816
>>> http://ckan.org/ticket/814
>>>
>>> Again, thanks for working on this! I'm very much looking forward to
>>> seeing
>>> some of these improvements go live on the site soon.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Richard
>>>
>>> [1] http://ckan.org/ticket/817
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> /*
>> richard at memespring.co.uk
>> memespring.co.uk
>> ++44 7976730458
>> memespring (flickr/skype/etc)
>> memspr (aim)
>> */
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>
>



-- 
/*
richard at memespring.co.uk
memespring.co.uk
++44 7976730458
memespring (flickr/skype/etc)
memspr (aim)
*/