Hi,
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 17:20:52 -0700
spencerone@??? wrote:
> I worked through the Greeter alternatives being preferred by everyone 
> and was able to identify some key concerns being weighed that we can 
> focus on to move forward and have complete consensus.
> 
> TL;DR - This[4] is what we should do.  Why?  Read below :)
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Note that the 'Storage' section is updated to reflect the current 
> Greeter Rationale[0].  However, I am unfamiliar with the benefits of 
> 'Enable' though I have trust and have included it; Alan, would you 
> explain so that I understand?
> 
I think that there is a misunderstanding. If you mean the [Enable] text
in [0], I think it refers to an icon you would click to enable the
storage.
[0]:
https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/greeter_revamp_UI/design_rationale_phase1/#index9h3
> Also note that I spaced out the current proposal[1] and that 'Language' 
> is ordered first as agreed.
> 
Great!
> 
> Key Concerns:
> 
> 1. Available canvas space as 'Privacy' options increase
> 
> 2. One-click Access [vs] Two-click Access
> 
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> 1. If 'Language' is not grouped with 'Privacy' then they should not 
> resemble each other (though tchou has some thoughts on still grouping 
> them with 'Language' ordered first).
I don't agree. The design you proposed before is coherent with GNOME3
design, while the one-liner:
- looks strange to me
- is far less clear about which line is what
> Also, Tails has a 'Language' 
> string at the footer during the current Greeter experience that, other 
> than its placement, is quite functional.  Using this could prevent 
> needing pagination for the self-guided flow because it frees up so much 
> vertical space. Here[2] is what the change would look like.
> 
> 2. To settle the pagination issue it seems that the question should be: 
> which is more important, one-click access, which means everything on one 
> dialog, or pagination of the 'Privacy' settings, which means two-click 
> access.  
I think that we should:
- take into account sajolida's point that it seems we agreed on not
  having the privacy settings displayed upfront
- keep the idea of a "check and go" screen that was one of the key
  principles of our design proposals and solves our tickets #8974 and
  #8976
- find a way to have something whould act like an expandable section
  but would fit the GNOME HIG
> However, I worked through that and discovered something.  Given 
> the logic to move "these are your DEFAULT settings" to the 'Settings' 
> section, there is no confirmation to the self-guided user that they are 
> using default privacy settings.
We should keep this information on the 1st screen I think!
>  Because of this, 'Start Tails' is 
> de-emphasized until they move to the next dialog.  This change conflicts 
> with the highly occurrent use case of starting Tails with default 
> settings on one click.
Please see the attached proposal.
> This also brings back the fork-in-the-road issue that I feel is best 
> resolved with a single button with two paths forking from there, as seen 
> here[3]; the mental model is more clear this way.
> 
> But for those who just despise the idea of a Mac-like 'Edit' button, 
> here[4] is the way we should go.  This isolates each step as the 
> default, Guided Configuration, and allows people to switch to 
> Self-guided Configuration.
> 
> Why is *this* the way to go?
> 
These two proposals reintroduce things that we dropped in the
previous process, with good reasons I think.
Cheers