Public Forums 71,145 posts

[ShannonN Friend ShannonNJoin date: July 2006Posts: 1947Downloads:0Uploads:9 Thanks: 16 Thanked: 172 times in 49 posts]

#293805

newone;115040If a term is commonly used and becomes part of our vocabulary, we can safely conclude that the user’s knowledge of that term comes from a certain level of awareness. Correct? Unless the user does not fully understand the term, he or she will always apply it incorrectly.

This idea is similar to the many tutorials I have seen on Joomla. Even though all the creators mean well, their lack of understanding of users, their own methodology, and assumptions of common understanding of the technical as well as the workflow leads credence to this.

How can something be web 2.0 on the backend and not on the frontend? Or better yet, how can a system be 2.0 for few selective users, but not for the majority without tinkering and hacks?

If the parameter for 2.0 is already there for publishers and admins as you suggest, then the system should be sufficient to replicate 2.0 for general users. If not, there is something inherently flawed with the system and its design.

Interesting JA doesn’t say anything about Web 2. several ja templates were described as web 2.? one just for a fancy but garish bunch of icons that magnified as a rollover, is that web 2.?

[newone Friend newoneJoin date: February 2008Posts: 34Downloads:7Uploads:0 Thanks: 4]

#294359

<em>@ShannonN 115057 wrote:</em><blockquote>Interesting JA doesn’t say anything about Web 2. several ja templates were described as web 2.? one just for a fancy but garish bunch of icons that magnified as a rollover, is that web 2.?</blockquote>

You need to ask Joomla Art what they mean by Web 2.0 templates? Given the general problems with compatibility issues and sluggishness with their templates, my guess is as good as yours.

Rollover icons is so 90s. 😀

[Author]

Posts