> On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 12:31:48PM -0800, erich@uruk.org wrote:
> > My general contention is that the system should, by default, behave as
> > non-experts would expect, but this might be a point where we can't
> > agree.
> >
> > It is, unfortunately, the cardinal rule when designing any usable
> > interfaces. I reference Donald Norman's "The Design of Everyday
> > Things". But I digress.
>
> I must agree with Alan. Low level technical interfaces should
> behave according to standards, and should follow a consistent logic
> understood by experts in the field (even if it is difficult for the
> beginner). If people try to push "usability" (and I'm as much a fan
> of that book as you) onto kernel interfaces, we'll wade into a swamp
> and never get out.
>
> Such interfaces need not be exposed to ordinary users. Indeed, by
> keeping the low-level layer simple and orthogonal, it becomes easier
> to build multiple user-facing layers (for different purposes, or for
> comparison at the same purpose). I think this principle is much
> more powerful than the one you advance.
You get no disagreement from me with the concept, and I'm following
a similar one in a system I'm working on now. (as to the standards
conformance, look at my most recent email a few messages ago on
that... we're arguing it out ;-).
The Linux kernel at this point, however, is not so easy/orthogonal
as you claim, I think. The question always arises: If there is
no other easy way to do something than modify your low-level
technical interface, then what do you do?
--
Erich Stefan Boleyn <erich@uruk.org> http://www.uruk.org/
"Reality is truly stranger than fiction; Probably why fiction is so popular"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/