I can't pass this one by < s >

Those 'requirements' sound basically fine to me.

Windows standards/guidelines are, in my humble opinion, aimed mainly at promoting ease of transition from application to application on a Windows® system. I don't see anything here that complicates/conflicts with that objective.

About 6 weeks ago I finished reading a book about user interface design FOR THE WEB (lent the book out and only remember the author is Jakob Neilsen (sp?)) and I must admit that I was surprised at the basic simplicity he was espousing. I agree with his writings but had guessed that he would be a promoter of some of the 'sexier' stuff appearing on the web.

good luck,

JimN

PS What ends up being decided may not be as interesting/sexy to work on, but your main objective is to make an application that works well for its users. Believe it or not, you CAN have fun doing that too, even if only low-tech components are prescribed.


>Hi all,
>
>I hope this is the correct forum for this....
>
>My Boss and I are meeting tomorrow to discuss user interface (forms). From previous conversations with her I know part of what she wants: 1) All labels and headings will be BOLD; 2) All controls will be FLAT; 3) no toolbars -- buttons on the form; 4) edit child records in a grid or use an array (with a button to display the next "page" of records); and 5) record locking. The reason she will want it this that is the way the original DOS program (since converted to FPW then transported to VFP) looked and performed. She will also say the she wants the application to be different looking.
>
>So my question: what are the current guidelines for interface control look and feel? MSDN review indicates she is exact opposite of the Windows development guidelines. Is she out of sync?
>
>PS: When I started this project she said she wanted a "true visual product".
>
>Thanks in advance for any information and comments
>
>
>Bob