Re: Generalised approach to storing address details

From: JOG <jog_at_cs.nott.ac.uk>
Date: 13 Dec 2006 11:47:47 -0800
Message-ID: <1166039266.933262.96290_at_l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com>


Marshall wrote:
> On Dec 13, 8:56 am, "Neo" <neo55..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > It has been proven in numerous research studies that menu's
> > > use is deletrious if nesting goes above two levels...
> > > Imprisoning users in Hierarchy and the simulation of paper in a more
> > > powerful media, are anchors round the neck of IT users that you would
> > > do well to not perpetuate.
> > > Very little in the world is hierarchical.
> > When using Google to read the multitude of posts within a thread (like
> > this one), do people find it imprisoning or liberating to use the
> > tree/hierarchal interface along the left side? Could it be improved by
> > limiting the depth to two levels or by presenting that information in a
> > tabular form?
>
> I frickin' *hate* the tree view in Google Groups. I kill that pane
> whenever I see
> it and just use pure thread view. Thread view rulez; tree view suxorz.
>
> Hierarchy suxorz also, for most things.
>
>
> Marshall

Aye. It is very rare to see a usenet forum in tree view these days. People prefer a linear view, because after a couple of nests our wee heeds start to hurt. In fact, nevermind that, try teaching a first year undergrad java and see how much your ears bleed when you they produce code with upteen levels of nested if-statement sprawling off the screen, and can no longer spot any of their own bugs.

Well, I guess there /are/ family trees - they're hierarchical right? And good luck explaining why to your wife or girlfriend! Received on Wed Dec 13 2006 - 20:47:47 CET

Original text of this message