Pagination directions

Although pagination is a widely diffused pattern, some times it can still be a bit confusing, when it comes to blogs.

Most blogs (and many news sites) have a couple of links at the bottom of the page, newer and older posts or articles. Of course, there are two opposite ways to arrange those links: put the newer link on the left and the older one on the right, or just the opposite. What I consider to be annoying (and confusing), is to find both alternatives used inconsistently across blogs and websites.

For example, the Google Blog puts the Newer Posts link on the left,

while the Worpress Blog places Newer Entries » on the right

Confusing, isn’t it? What is the right way to show those links?

Pagination by itself is quite clear: most web users have long become accustomed to Google search results pagination,

and Yahoo’s Design Patter Library states it clearly:

• Present links in the following order: ‘Prev’, page links, ‘Next’.
• Display a left arrow after the label ‘Prev’.
• Display a right arrow before the label ‘Next’.

In other words, previous goes to the left, while next goes to the right.

The problem with blogs and articles is that it’s not clear what should we consider the “previous page”.

Is it the one with the older (previous) posts? Or, since articles are listed starting from the more recent ones, the page with the more recent posts?

I think any answer would be debatable, and that’s the source of all the confusion. What would you say?

Itsme: is the desktop metaphor really over?

Last week a friend of mine, knowing my increasing interest in interaction design, forwarded me the poster of a talk held in University of Milano-Bicocca about a new project named itsme.

Since I always welcome any excuse to visit my alma mater and one of the speakers has been my professor during my studies, I took half a day off work and went to attend the seminar, filled with curiosity.

According to its creators, itsme tries to move away from the desktop metaphor towards a new one, focused on “stories and venues”. Trying to sum up the ideas behind the project (I suggest you to visit their site for the full story), stories are linked to the purpose and motivation behind the actions we perform on our workstations. Venues are a sort of virtual place that collects all the files, documents, media, contacts  and information in general which are related to a story.

I really like the idea, because it can be an effective way to organize heterogeneous information, which is something we all try to do. Advanced computer users need to catalog a huge volume of data in a way that suits their own needs, and each of them ends up developing a unique set of tricks, expedients and conventions to make this task easier.

But that’s a challenge that becomes more and more overwhelming with the growth in complexity and diversity of the information to aggregate (think about audio messages and IM, for example). That’s where a decent support for venues would make a serious difference. And that’s why I like the general idea behind itsme.

There is one point that leaves me perplexed, though.

Although it always sounds cool to be radical and challenge the status quo (as Seth would say), I wonder if leaving totally behind the desktop metaphor is really a good idea after all. The vast majority of computer users are familiar with it and, although often ineffective for some complex activities, it’s adequate for a lot of the simpler ones.

Certainly they considered augmenting, rather than replacing, the desktop metaphor with stories and venues. I’m curious to know what led them to choose the latter option.

Wasn’t it possible to implement their vision on top of existing Operating Systems? Frankly, I doubt it.

Moreover, I am curious to learn how (if) they are planning to handle sharing and collaboration: the speech and all the material I saw sounded pretty vague about this subject.

Just a note: the project is due in 2010. If itsme were a web 2.0 project it would be an eternity, wouldn’t it?

If you can’t get what you want…

…maybe you just don’t want it strongly enough.

CxO humour

One of the last books I read contained a brief glossary at the end, with definitions of frequent and common terms in the IT business.

In particular, what it said about CxOs made me smile:

CEO

The guy/gal in the big office. This is a tough gig. CEOs are usually busier than you can imagine.

CFO

The guy/gal who tells you how many PCs or Macs you can buy

CIO

The guy/gal who tells you whether you can use a Mac or a PC

CTO

The guy/gal who tells you which is better, a Mac or a PC

Does it sound familiar?

If you’re curious about the book, it’s Managing Humans, by Michael Lopp.

Augmenting cityscape

I had the inspiration for the subject of this post this summer, while having a walk in Milan with a friend. As we passed in front of the XIV century Sforza Castle (italian: Castello Sforzesco), we noticed it was lit by coloured lights, which gave it a quite peculiar aspect.

Castello Sforzesco by night. Photo by --Nick-- on Flickr.

The most notable aspect, however, is that the colour of the light can change over time (this is what is called dynamic lighting): the following time I was in the square in front of the Castle, it was lit by purple light.

The usage of lighting for aesthetic reasons is widely diffused as it’s an important aspect of architectural design. The illumination of the Sforza Castle, for example, was designed by light+, a design studio specialized in lighting for architecture.

While I like the idea of dynamic lighting, though, I’d love to see a different usage of illumination.

For years, light has been used in signaling, to carry some message across distance (on board of ships, for example). Nowadays, a lot of electronic devices include LEDs to communicate meaningful information to their owners.

Architectural lighting can be used to communicate as well: for example, the colour used to illuminate of a given landmark could change depending on the weather forecast for the following day.

While this is a trivial example, light can be used to enrich city landmarks to broadcast some message to anyone seeing them. While maintaining its decorative purpouse, light can transcend mere aesthetics, and used to bear a meaning by itself.

Just as in the past centuries, when people used to look at clock towers to get information that was relevant to them, we can make people see buildings and monuments under a new light. Literally.

If you know of any example of this approach, please let me know.