Phil Dawes' Stuff - Latest Comments in Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Alex James — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 08:33:40 -0000

Hey Phil... I just posted some screenshots of the SchemaBrowser/Builder app that now allows you to create as well as browse schemas, it is now near completion. I think of this as a Developer or Analyst tool.

As you can see it is a WebApp.

Next step is the a List/ListBuilder application, which will also be a WebApp. I am starting on that now. This List/ListBuilder application will be targeted at end users rather than developers.

I look at it like this: Developers or Analysts lay a framework of data down using the SchemaBrowser/Builder, which the end users can then use to create Lists to report on and edit that data.

Anyway you might be interested.

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Phil Dawes — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:08:54 -0000

Ah -ok. I was thinking of high transaction volumes from a server perspective rather than in terms of individual productivity.

This is an interesting point; My day consists of using a small number of desktop UIs constantly (email, unix console, emacs, browser), and a whole load of other intranet web based UIs infrequently (low 10s of times a day)?
How does this tally with others? Is there a trend to using more interfaces less frequently as the repetitive tasks get automated?

(I should also mention that django does provide some ui hints aimed at productivity - e.g. you can nominate to inline child objects with their parents, display a variable number of empty ones for quicker entry etc.)

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Dominic Sayers — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:28:18 -0000

We will agree to differ on the size of the sweet spot.

To answer your question, high transaction volumes (if they arise from human input) should have a fundamental bearing on UI design. In this case you are designing for productivity. The challenges differ depending on whether your users are rapid data-entry clerks or simply the millions of great unwashed who want to use your website and don't want to spend all day learning how to do so.

In either case it is worth investing in an optimised UI and not making do with an auto-generated one.

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Phil Dawes — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:01:20 -0000

Hi Dom,

Only if the app is only ever used by techies for low transaction volumes then you might consider putting the UI into production.

I can see what you're getting at, but I don't think I agree. I'm not saying that any application is a suitable candidate for a generic rdb mapped UI, but I'd say that the sweet spot is pretty big even with just a small amount of sophistication in the mapping.
Assuming the web as the deployment platform, people are already used to using pretty basic (and generic) UI widgets and layouts for entering and manipulating data.

Also, why low transaction volumes? - I'd argue that transactional volumes don't have much bearing on UI design - more on the actual data modelling and access patterns, which you'd be doing with an RDB anyway. (or have I mis-understood something?)

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Dominic Sayers — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 07:48:30 -0000

Automatically-generated or fully dynamic UIs may be a good way of prototyping the functionality of an app. Only if the app is only ever used by techies for low transaction volumes then you might consider putting the UI into production.

I have NEVER seen an auto-generated UI that you would want to give to actual users. Don't make the mistake of thinking that dabbledb does this - it is a meticulously hand-crafted UI for a specific set of functions. It is partially dynamic to reflect the configuration that users choose - this is a good thing.

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Phil Dawes — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:40:20 -0000

Hi Alex,

I watched the demo (which I think cropped a bit - it finished just as you were getting to the wrapped fogbugz database). The schema metadata is pretty much what I was thinking of, although a rich GUI that can be given to users is the big win from the perspective of the post. I'd be interested to see what you can construct from the metadata in this regard.

(Unfortunately I didn't actually try the software because I don't run windows, but I'm definitely interested in the approach!)

Re: Application UIs - automating the CRUD

Alex James — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:25:47 -0000

Phil I have been working on something like this on and off for sometime. I already have a system for wrapping and extending existing databases in a schematized way called Base4... which is very similar to what MS promised with WinFS. Base4 allows you to register schemas at runtime.

The key then is a gui to use this rich and powerful foundation, I have been playing around with a schema designer (www.base4.net/blog.aspx?ID=11) which I plan on extending in an application called work the list (www.base4.net/blog.aspx?ID=6).In which people can create views (or lists) over the relational data exposed by Base4. These views will in time be read/write. They key to the power of this is that Base4 can wrap multiple databases and make them look like one,by using Schema based declarative integration.

I think this is quite similar to what you are talking about. Interested in your thoughts

Alex