[Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity

[Kemp Johnathan]

 >rootIcon.setNavigationStyle()
1. What are the options? rootIcon.setNavigationStyle("historic"),
 rootIcon.setNavigationStyle("linear").

2. Does Xerte / XOT keep a history even if navigation is set to linear, or
will the storing of navigation history only commence once
rootIcon.setNavigationStyle() has been called to set the navigation style
to historic?

>keep back and next linear except when arriving at a page from a connector
where the author has set that the back should be history back.
3. Setting navigation to historic would have to take place before arriving
at a none connector page. . Where would you want to be able to set
navigation to linear / historic (pick as many as you like)
a) as a option of the learning object
b) as an option of the Connector page
c) as an option of an exit from a connector page (e.g. a hotspot, MCQ
answer option)?

Personally I think it should be set at the learning object level so that
navigation remains consistent throughout the project.

>For the back button on a destination page perhaps the Navigate on exit
options should include an extra tick box option: Back History?

3. Once navigation is set to historic it will persist as historic until set
otherwise. Since the none connector pages do not offer an option to set
navigation, if a Connector page is used to set navigation to historic, then
navigation would remain historic throughout the whole project until a
connector page was reached and navigation was reset. Is that what you want
to happen?

> Most of the time I would expect to only have either back, or next, not
both, enabled on my destination page.

4. I also anticipate projects which combine connector and none connector
pages. Separate enabling of individual navigation buttons (back, next,
toc,) is what we started with and this was considered over complicated. It
requires careful thought by the author as the navigation options set will
persist until the next connector page is reached and an exit from that page
can reset the navigation. If I set up the connector pages that offer
Navigation on Exit to offer the following options  "Back, Next and TOC",
"Back and Next", "Back only", "Next only". will that be acceptable?

I want Connector pages to meet peoples needs and I want to allay peoples
concerns, but I don't want to keep having to revisit this with the
subsequent need to keep recoding the pages.

Kind regards

Johnathan

On 31 July 2012 10:43, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:

> >In short
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> >keep back and next linear except when arriving at a page from a connector
> where the author has set that the back should be history back. But also
> restore the options to disable next, back or both options.
>
> So nothing else needs to change?
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Ron Mitchell
> *Sent:* 30 July 2012 17:18
> *To:* 'For Xerte technical developers'
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> My personal thoughts...
>
> Note: Wherever I refer to a destination page I mean a page arrived at from
> a connector page.
>
>
>
> 1. I suspect some connector pages will be used far more than others - some
> will be popular others a bit too complex for most XOT users
>
> 2. I personally wouldn't want to see the connector pages removed now but
> having said that I would also like to see Tom's solution in place so that
> an XOT admin could decide what page types are shown and what aren't for a
> given installation - there are others not relevant for all
> installations/users and for new installations an admin might want to only
> show the basics to begin with.**
>
> 3. I agree the standard navigation buttons should be consistent but I
> think a common use of at least some of the connectors would be more
> interactive links to non-connector pages (not just connector to connector)
> and indeed I'm not sure why there's no longer an option to show only the
> back button, or only the forward button, or neither, rather than just the
> two options shown below? Most of the time I would expect to only have
> either back, or next, not both, enabled on my destination page.
>
>
>
> 4. For the way I would use connectors most often and the way I would
> envisage showing others to use them, I don't think the forward button ever
> needs to be a history forward button. If it ever needed to be something
> other than linear next I would want to disable it and provide the link via
> another method e.g. hyperlink or via another connector page. However for
> this to work I'd like to see those options restored to the navigation on
> exit options. e.g. Back only, Next only, No Navigation.
>
> 5. For the back button on a destination page perhaps the Navigate on exit
> options should include an extra tick box option: Back History? I don't
> think this will ever cause confusion e.g. it will be obvious from the
> learning activity that whenever back history has been set by the author
> clicking back returns to the previous connector page.
>
>
>
> 6. In short - keep back and next linear except when arriving at a page
> from a connector where the author has set that the back should be history
> back. But also restore the options to disable next, back or both options.
>
>
>
> HTH
>
> Ron
>
>
>
> **(Ideally on a user level basis e.g. beginner/intermediate/advanced but I
> guess that's a future wish list item)
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Kemp Johnathan
> *Sent:* 30 July 2012 15:16
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> I hope I have positioned this so that there is no additional scrolling
> required :-)
>
>
>
> I don't want to debate against you, I want to work with you to find a way
> forward :-)
>
>
>
> Connector pages can manage without a historical next.
>
>
>
> The lack of a historical back button is only a problem when you use a
> mixture of connector and none connector pages and want to set up specific
> routes through the project. This is because the back button could enable
> the learner to step "off the route" (which would not be possible with a
> historical back button). However if a historical back button is deemed
> inappropriate then it may be possible for the learning object author to
> avoid the issue by careful use of the Connector pages. If the author
> ensures that each branch of a "route" starts with a connector page e.g.
> Plain Text Connector offering a link to the first none connector page in
> the sequence for that branch, then the learner will not be able to go back
> to a page off route as the linear back button will take them back to the
> plain text connector that started the branch, which would have navigation
> disabled. It is not as elegant as a historic back button as a solution, but
> it would work and it would avoid the concerns of having navigation buttons
> that worked in different ways.
>
>
>
> So we could get away with just linear navigation and still use the
> Connector pages.
>
>
>
> How does that sound?
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Johnathan
>
>
>
> On 30 July 2012 13:54, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> I think the problem is the navigation buttons. No one is debating that
> routing or branching through content might be useful. But if the interface
> suddenly starts doing things differently / inconsistently, that is a
> problem.
>
>
>
> Right now, linear navigation works fine: in linear mode, it works; in menu
> with page controls, it also works I think; and in menu only, you don’t see
> the buttons, so it’s not a problem. You hit the TOC to go to the menu; you
> go next and back through the content. That is consistent, predictable. The
> buttons always do the same things.
>
>
>
> During testing, the historical back kept surprising me with what happened.
> That tells me there is a problem with it.
>
>
>
> Having a next button that is sometimes a next button and sometimes a fwd
> button worries me.
>
>
>
> I have always mandated doing branching by jumping to other LOs for the sub
> sections.
>
>
>
> I have spent a lot of time here at the University re-working content that
> had crazy Authorware-era navigation systems, branching etc. In many, it was
> impossible to find your way back to the information you knew was there, but
> you couldn’t remember how you got there.
>
>
>
> Users will not differentiate between ‘linear’ and ‘menu’ driven content,
> to them it is just content, and they will expect the buttons to do the same
> thing every time they click them.
>
>
>
> So, without the connectors in the picture, we don’t really have a problem.
> I don’t have  problem with the connectors per se, but I do have a problem
> with the implications for an interface that people already know and use.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Kemp Johnathan
>
>
> *Sent:* 30 July 2012 12:58
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> Hello Julian,
>
>
>
> There is always the possibility for people to create bad stuff. Some of
> the worst "e-learning" material I have come across has consisted of a
> series of pages of information with the odd quiz thrown in on the
> assumption that this will somehow "test learning". I don't think there is
> an e-learning development tool on the planet that can prevent people form
> creating "bad stuff". However if a software tool is limited in its features
> it can prevent the creation of more engaging learning objects.
>
>
>
> The ability to offer branching (or connections if you prefer) can allow
> for the development of learning objects that require users to think and
> make decisions (including mistakes) and then learn from the results of
> those decisions. But any development tool that supports this feature will
> also require of the author that they think about how they set up their
> routing through the project or learning object.
>
>
>
> I don't think that this is about standalone Xerte V XOT in that the
> connector pages do not require someone to have access to the structure of
> the page.
>
> ·         The people who are happy with sequential projects simply won't
> bother with the Connector pages.
>
> ·         Other users will use the simpler connector pages to flag up
> pages of interest or provide sub menus, without actually defining specific
> routes through a project. I am thinking here of the menu connector page,
> hotspot image connector and plain text connector.
>
> ·         Those who want to set up specific routing will start making use
> of the tab navigator connector and the redirector connector.
>
> ·         It may take some time before anyone embraces the Scenario
> connector. But the reaction last September to the demo of the prototype
> page suggests that there will be some people out there who will be excited
> by it and will want to make use of it. I think that once a few working
> examples that use the Scenario page are produced, then interest in the page
> will grow. However initially people will have to get their head around what
> it does and how they can make use of it.
>
> It seems to me there are a couple of issues that are causing the main
> concern.
>
> 1.      The Navigation issue - i.e. the need for a historic back button
> when projects are being created that use Connector pages to set up specific
> routes through a project. Perhaps what might help with this is if the back
> button icon could change to indicate when a project was using an "historic"
> back button. This would avoid learner confusion caused by the back button
> doing something unexpected. Maybe a back arrow with three overlapping
> rectangles (a bit like the way the drag-able items stack in the time-line
> matching pairs page.) would be enough to convey the idea.
>
> 2.      The complexity of some of the pages, in particular the tabbed
> Navigator Connector and the Scenario Connector. There is documentation to
> support the use of these pages. There are already in Xerte and XOT pages
> that are not intuitive to use e.g. the Interactive Diagram (customHotspots)
> which works differently from any other page. The mapstraction page (I have
> still not figured this one out yet!) There is no documentation to support
> their use.
>
>
>
> XOT has captured a large audience. Will it really frighten someone off XOT
> if they can't cope with a particular page? Or will they just ignore that
> page type in future and stick with what they are comfy with? Meanwhile
> those who are eager for more features will start producing even more
> interesting and diverse learning objects.
>
> ·         Is the XOT community best served by assuming a lowest common
> denominator and then rejecting anything that might rise above that level of
> challenge?
>
> ·         Will the learners who use XOT generated learning objects have a
> better learning experience if they are challenged more and have to engage
> more with their learning?
>
> ·         There is an awareness in the XOT community of the new
> developments. Expectations have been raised. Do we let down those
> expectations now?
>
> It seems to me that like any group of people XOT users are a diverse
> group. Just as there will be some who will only use the simplest of pages
> and may panic at anything a little different, there will also be others who
> whilst valuing XOT, would like to be able to do more with it. I remember
> Ron's reaction when he saw that some of my pages included a "transition"
> property for images - he thought it should be included with all pages that
> offered images. Ron also, independently came up with an idea for a hotspot
> image connector page.
>
>
>
> We have discussed on prior occasions the merits of being able to set up
> routing in a project or learning object. IMHO this is a significant feature
> that currently XOT lacks and that is offered by some competing commercial
> products.
>
>
>
> At the end of the day it will be your decision whether to include the
> connector pages. If you include them, authors will have the opportunity to
> choose not to use them.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Johnathan
>
>
>
>
>
> On 30 July 2012 10:49, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> These issues are making me seriously question whether to release the
> connectors as part of toolkits. For standalone developers, then fair
> enough, the result is up to you, but there is the possibility for people to
> create bad stuff here, and toolkits shouldn’t let people make bad stuff.
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Kemp Johnathan
>
> *Sent:* 27 July 2012 19:28
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> The functionality would not change depending on the page you were on, the
> functionality of the navigation would apply to the whole learning object.
>
>
>
> If connector pages are being used to set up specific routes through a
> project than a historic back button is essential. We can probably manage
> with a linear next button as the connector pages can be set up so that the
> navigation is disabled when on a connector page.
>
>
>
> Where connector pages are being used to set up routes through a learning
> object then a project wide menu is counter productive. I would anticipate
> any project that is using connector pages to set up specific routes through
> a project to be implemented using the linear option as it is the only
> option that does not implement a project wide menu. Perhaps there needs to
> be a new option "Historic" so that all current Linear projects perform as
> they always did, but authors can have an option that presents an LO with no
> start menu and a historic back button.
>
>
>
> The user interface will probably appear a little different as the
> connector pages will disable the navigation and when non-connector pages
> are used the option to set navigation on exit of a connector page should be
> taken to only provide next and back (i.e. historic back) buttons.
>
>
>
> If a menu is required the connector menu will provide the capability to
> implement a menu that only offers selected pages, thus restricting access
> to only appropriate starting points for different sections of the LO.
>
>
>
> I can appreciate the concerns that are being expressed.
>
>
>
> Connector pages present a new paradigm. LOs that use Connector Pages to
> set up routes through LOs are going to provide a different experience for
> Xerte users. However since there would normally be limited use of menus the
> fact that the back button is historic may pass largely unnoticed by the
> user.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Johnathan
>
>
>
> On 27 July 2012 10:58, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > if the behaviour of the forward button changes depending on what you do
>
> That would get us onto interfacesfromhell.com. If we ever have to explain
> how this works to a user, we have failed.
>
>
>
> What worries me is that at present, you can set the navigation style with
> rootIcon.setNavigationStyle(style), but to our users, the functionality in
> what appears to be the same interface changes between different LOs. This
> troubles me.
>
>
>
> In linear pieces, I agree: it should do linear next / prev; in menu
> without page controls, it works fine too: there are no buttons! When you
> use the menu with page controls setting, currently it does the back /next
> (as opposed to prev / next).
>
>
>
> The implications are very much with the connectors I think, as it would be
> possible for people to make some really terrible decisions if they start
> changing the functionality based on the type of page you are on. That MUST
> NOT happen.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Fay Cross
>
> *Sent:* 26 July 2012 08:55
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> I think this is really tricky to get right.  I can see the argument for
> historical forward and back working really well on projects with connector
> pages but think it could get confusing if the behaviour of the forward
> button changes depending on what you do.
>
>
>
> For example, a LO is set up as Menu with controls.  The user reads the
> first few of pages in a LO using the forward button to navigate to the next
> numerical page. They then decide to use the menu the skip ahead several
> pages.  They realise they have skipped some important information so use
> the back button to return to the page they were previously on.  Now they
> try to continue navigating through the LO as they had previously by
> clicking the forward button – but using the historical forward button this
> will skip them past several pages again.  The only way for them to get to
> the pages they missed is to use the menu again.  I think this could be
> confusing, especially as there’s no indication on the menu what pages you
> had visited.
>
>
>
> Not sure what the answer is but I don’t know if historical forwards is
> necessarily what people would expect to happen, especially when mixed up
> with linear in certain circumstances.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Kemp Johnathan
>
> *Sent:* 25 July 2012 19:45
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> If you go down the two separate types of navigation approach then you
> would not necessarily  implement the mix of historic and linear next button.
>
>
>
> What you are suggesting is that if history.length = 0, then go next, else
> go forward?
>
>
>
> What I am suggesting is that if you have a historic back button then it
> makes sense to offer a historic next button so that the navigation remains
> within a single paradigm. The idea of providing a linear element to the
> next button, only when the user has no legitimate historic next value, is
> really to accommodate the difference between Xerte and a web page. Web
> pages have links in them to enable you to exit them. Standard Xerte pages
> do not.
>
>
>
> If people are going to use the Connector pages they will need the historic
> back button. The type of project an author will want to be selecting will
> be one that does NOT offer a menu of all the pages. The author is unlikely
> to want to provide the end user with a means of bypassing the routes
> through the learning object that the author creates by using the Connector
> pages. Giving them access to a menu of all the pages will do just that.
>
>
>
> I’m finding it hard to get straight in my head (whether your suggestion
> provides a simple, predictable navigation system), and that tells me
> something is wrong:
>
>
>
> Then it is my description that is at fault. The simplest way to describe
> the navigation I am proposing is that it works just like Internet Explorer
> or Opera, with the additional feature, if deemed appropriate, that in
> situations where IE or Opera would show the next button disabled, then in
> Xerte the next button could remain enabled by offering a link to the next
> page in the project's linear sequence.
>
>
>
> The hard part is describing the specific details and rules that apply that
> enable the creation of such a navigation system. In use it is intuitive -
> it is just the way a web browser works.
>
>
>
> The current combination we have in Xerte of a historic back button and a
> purely linear next button is what is likely to throw people.
>
>
>
> We need the author to be able to implement as a minimum, the current
> historic back button navigation without also implementing a project wide
> menu. Better would be to also have a historic next button, so that the
> historic navigation would be consistent.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Johnathan
>
>
>
> On 25 July 2012 16:38, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> I think the problem is as you say, the mix between a historical back
> button and a linear next button. The two (strong) mental models people will
> bring are the digital book (linear, prev and fwd); or the browser (back in
> history, forward in history); we are kinda mixing them up. In a browser you
> navigate with links; here we are navigating with the fwd button.
>
>
>
> What I’ve done is put the navigation back to the old way for linear
> projects; either of the menu options give the back (in history)
> functionality. Next always goes to the next page.
>
>
>
> What you are suggesting is that if history.length = 0, then go next, else
> go forward? I think we are screwing with people’s mental models here? I’m
> finding it hard to get straight in my head (whether your suggestion
> provides a simple, predictable navigation system), and that tells me
> something is wrong: this shouldn’t need explaining, we will be doing
> something wrong if anyone ever asks a question about the navigation system.
>
>
>
> Hmm.
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Kemp Johnathan
>
> *Sent:* 25 July 2012 16:29
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
>
>
> I'm sorry that it has taken me a while to respond to this thread, I have
> been otherwise engaged for most of yesterday and today and before I could
> respond adequately I needed to check a few things.
>
>
>
> The standard Xerte project has to date been treated as if you are reading
> a book. No history just turn to the previous or next page relative to the
> one you are currently viewing. When you use the TOC you are just opening
> the book at a new page. Back and Next are then relative to that new page.
>
>
>
> The Connector pages introduced a different paradigm for the project. This
> paradigm required a historical back button. As an example consider a
> multiple choice connector page. Each of the answer options can link to a
> sequence of none connector pages, i.e. If the connector page is P1 then
>
> option 1 may go to P2 which leads to P3 to P4 and P5 is a redirector page
> to P10
>
> option 2 may go to P6 which leads to P7 to P8 and P9 is a redirector page
> to P10
>
>
>
> The historical back is needed to ensure that if you traverse backward from
> P8 to P7 to P6 that the next backward action does not take you to P5 but to
> P1.
>
>
>
> This inevitably clashes with the book paradigm when you use the TOC which
> is what Julian found. It will inevitably feel a little strange to Xerte
> users who are used to the book paradigm. However it does mirror the way a
> back button works in a web browser, so in a sense it will be what will be
> expected by anyone opening a Xerte project for the first time.
>
>
>
> However browser users will be confused by the Xerte next button, as
> browsers that offer a next button base their next on the browser history.
> Such browsers (IE, Opera) appear to operate by building a history and
> maintaining a pointer as the history is navigated. Whenever a link is
> followed (rather than a back or next button) the "next" half of the history
> is deleted, so that on page exit the current page is added as the most
> recent page in the history.
>
>
>
> If there are to be on offer in Xerte a choice between the original
> navigation or historic navigation then the historic navigation would be
> improved if it also was reflected in the operation of the next button.
>
>
>
> I have performed some tests in opera to figure out what is going on and
> have attached a pdf file to explain everything. The pdf file opens with a
> worked example  of how a historic navigation that accommodated a back and
> next button would operate. The last page identifies the rules that would be
> required in Xerte to implement such a navigation in the xerte navigation.
>
>
>
> I hope this helps. The example can take a little effort to get your head
> around, but the actions that need to happen with respect to each button
> are, I think pretty straight forward to implement for someone who knows
> there way around the appropriate Xerte flash file.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Johnathan.
>
>
>
> On 25 July 2012 10:41, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> I’ve done that, need to play around with it and see if it feels better.
> Opinions welcome.
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Julian Tenney
>
> *Sent:* 25 July 2012 09:29
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> OK. I think I’m going to put the default back to the way it was, and add a
> method to the interface calss to allow the developer to chose: that way it
> can be linear for linear navigation, and use the history if navigation is
> menu.
>
>
>
> Does this sound sensible?
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Fay Cross
>
> *Sent:* 25 July 2012 08:27
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> I only realised it did the back to previous page viewed rather than
> numerical back when doing the testing a couple of weeks ago so I did find
> it a bit odd. I think it’s because I thought of the LO pages to be like
> pages in a book rather than web pages so history back was unexpected.
>
>
>
> So at the moment does a linear layout have numerical forward and back and
> menu layout have history back and numerical forward?  If the linear one has
> history back I do think this could confuse users when they’ve changed page
> using table of contents.
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Julian Tenney
>
> *Sent:* 24 July 2012 11:35
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> Ah, but then back would have taken me just one page back, and I could go
> one page forward again…
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Ron Mitchell
>
> *Sent:* 24 July 2012 11:29
>
> *To:* 'For Xerte technical developers'
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> But you weren't able to do that previously either?
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] *On Behalf Of *Julian Tenney
>
> *Sent:* 24 July 2012 11:16
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> Has it felt right to you whilst testing? Mostly it does feel OK, but the
> time it gribble me out is when I use the TOC to jump to a page, hit back
> (go back to page one) and then can’t easily (without re-opening the TOC)
> get back to the page I was just on (cos there’s no ‘forward’). It somehow
> doesn’t feel quite right
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [
> mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>]
> *On Behalf Of *Ron Mitchell
>
> *Sent:* 24 July 2012 11:08
>
> *To:* 'For Xerte technical developers'
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Re: Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> I think it's fine the way it is now with back being history back and next
> being next numeric page but if you've found inconsistencies with the
> history back perhaps it would be better to revert back to what it's always
> been. Not sure about author control wouldn't that lead to confusion where
> sometimes it's history and sometimes it's linear?
>
>
>
> *From:* xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [
> mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>]
> *On Behalf Of *Julian Tenney
>
> *Sent:* 24 July 2012 10:49
>
> *To:* For Xerte technical developers
>
> *Subject:* [Xerte-dev] Back / Next Functionlaity
>
>
>
> What do you think: we made the back button in the interface go back in
> history, rather than back in pages: this seems to work well in some
> situations, but whilst testing, I have hit back several times and not gone
> where I expected to, and can’t go forward: do you think we should have it
> so that the developer can chose which way it works?
>
>
>
> So, for a linear interface, it works as it did before, going back and
> forth on page numbers; if it’s a menu driven piece, it goes back in history?
>
>
>
> I think the problem I found in terms of inconsistencies is that forward
> always takes you next, rather than forward in history when back goes back
> in history rather than pages (read that again carefully).
>
>
>
> Next can’t be forward, as it’s the main way of getting to the next,
> unvisited page.
>
>
>
> This should do what the user expects because it grates when you don’t go
> where you wanted.
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not
> use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any
> attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do
> not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Xerte-dev mailing list
>
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
>
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
>
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
>
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Xerte-dev mailing list
>
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
>
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
>
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
>
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Xerte-dev mailing list
>
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
>
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
>
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
>
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Xerte-dev mailing list
>
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
>
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
>
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
>
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xerte-dev mailing list
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xerte-dev mailing list
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and
> may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in
> error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20120731/3750beb6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3749 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20120731/3750beb6/attachment-0001.jpg>