re-ordering the tabs
John Mazzitelli
mazz at redhat.com
Mon Nov 29 15:46:00 UTC 2010
I'm looking at the tabs, and I don't see any rhyme or reason why they
are ordered the way they are:
Summary, Monitor, Inventory, Operations, Alerts, Configuration, Events
Can I recommend we change this order to:
Summary, Inventory, Alert, Monitor, Operations, Configuration, Events
for the following reasons:
Summary, Inventory relate to what makes up the resource - what it IS -
it defines the resource itself and how its constituted. So we keep them
together and up front.
Alerts relate to what the resource did or is doing that is abnormal -
its really standalone. But we have it here, third, for a reason, see below.
Monitor, Operations, Configuration, Events are all subsystems that
describe what the resource is doing or can do. Thus, we keep them all
together. Since Operations, Config and Events are optional, they appear
after Monitor (thus, since Monitor always exists, its always first in
this group, the other three can appear in any combination depending on
the resource type).
Note:
Summary, Inventory, Alert and Monitor always exist - so the first four
tabs will always be in the same place for any resource (i.e. the UI will
be consistent no matter what resource you are looking for). e.g. If I
want to go to an alert tab, I know, regardless of what resource I'm
looking at, I need to go to the third tab.
And for groups, its basically the same - the first THREE tabs are always
the same. So, no matter what I'm looking at - a compat group, mixed
group, auto-group or individual resource, the first three tabs are
always the same. Full consistency of the tabs across every view - the
only tabs that come and go are the subsystem tabs and they are on the
far right - the location of summary, inventory, alerts, monitor never move.
Unless there are objections, I would like to alter the tabs so they
appear in the order as described above.
More information about the rhq-devel
mailing list