Re: Generalised approach to storing address details

> > > It has been proven in numerous research studies that menu's use is deletrious
> > > if nesting goes above two levels... File systems are the only real vestige of
> > > hierarchy left and are a well known and are rapidly changing to add none
> > > hierarchical features...
> >
> > If hierarchal interfaces are so deletrious and we have numerous
> > research studies to prove it, why not extend this to the file explorer
> > and limit it two levels?
>
> Why not indeed?

Have you opened your file explorer recently? Starting from desktop, it not too difficult to find folders 11 levels deep. While some users can manage their files within two levels, are you seriously suggesting that it would be more intuitive to organize all the files in a computer within two levels? Do you personally manage your files within two folder levels?

> If search was better we wouldn't have directory trees.

What is deficient with file explorer's current search abilities that prevents you from managing all your computer files without directory trees?

> > > JOG: Very little in the world is hierarchical.
> > Neo: How about physicals things like cars and airplanes?
> Marshall: Physical things have atoms which form molecules. Any other
> organizational principle is an abstraction made by the mind,
> not an attribute of the object.

So would a BOM for a cars look like the following:

Car

   molecules

       atoms

Isn't it still hierarchal and futhermore not as intuitive as a hierarchy of parts like chassis, engine, transmission, etc?

> Trees do have their uses. They can be a good fit for when nodes have
> no particular relationship with each other...

So a hierarchal interface would not be a good fit for BOMs since parts has a particular relationship with each other? Do you prefer the list or table interface for BOMs? Could you show how you would like a car BOM to be displayed? Received on Thu Dec 14 2006 - 16:26:22 CET