Search Results

Search found 13639 results on 546 pages for 'design principles'.

Page 34/546 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • What Makes a Good Design Critic? CHI 2010 Panel Review

    - by jatin.thaker
    Author: Daniel Schwartz, Senior Interaction Designer, Oracle Applications User Experience Oracle Applications UX Chief Evangelist Patanjali Venkatacharya organized and moderated an innovative and stimulating panel discussion titled "What Makes a Good Design Critic? Food Design vs. Product Design Criticism" at CHI 2010, the annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. The panelists included Janice Rohn, VP of User Experience at Experian; Tami Hardeman, a food stylist; Ed Seiber, a restaurant architect and designer; John Kessler, a food critic and writer at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution; and Larry Powers, Chef de Cuisine at Shaun's restaurant in Atlanta, Georgia. Building off the momentum of his highly acclaimed panel at CHI 2009 on what interaction design can learn from food design (for which I was on the other side as a panelist), Venkatacharya brought together new people with different roles in the restaurant and software interaction design fields. The session was also quite delicious -- but more on that later. Criticism, as it applies to food and product or interaction design, was the tasty topic for this forum and showed that strong parallels exist between food and interaction design criticism. Figure 1. The panelists in discussion: (left to right) Janice Rohn, Ed Seiber, Tami Hardeman, and John Kessler. The panelists had great insights to share from their respective fields, and they enthusiastically discussed as if they were at a casual collegial dinner. John Kessler stated that he prefers to have one professional critic's opinion in general than a large sampling of customers, however, "Web sites like Yelp get users excited by the collective approach. People are attracted to things desired by so many." Janice Rohn added that this collective desire was especially true for users of consumer products. Ed Seiber remarked that while people looked to the popular view for their target tastes and product choices, "professional critics like John [Kessler] still hold a big weight on public opinion." Chef Powers indicated that chefs take in feedback from all sources, adding, "word of mouth is very powerful. We also look heavily at the sales of the dishes to see what's moving; what's selling and thus successful." Hearing this discussion validates our design work at Oracle in that we listen to our users (our diners) and industry feedback (our critics) to ensure an optimal user experience of our products. Rohn considers that restaurateur Danny Meyer's book, Setting the Table: The Transforming Power of Hospitality in Business, which is about creating successful restaurant experiences, has many applicable parallels to user experience design. Meyer actually argues that the customer is not always right, but that "they must always feel heard." Seiber agreed, but noted "customers are not designers," and while designers need to listen to customer feedback, it is the designer's job to synthesize it. Seiber feels it's the critic's job to point out when something is missing or not well-prioritized. In interaction design, our challenges are quite similar, if not parallel. Software tasks are like puzzles that are in search of a solution on how to be best completed. As a food stylist, Tami Hardeman has the demanding and challenging task of presenting food to be as delectable as can be. To present food in its best light requires a lot of creativity and insight into consumer tastes. It's no doubt then that this former fashion stylist came up with the ultimate catch phrase to capture the emotion that clients want to draw from their users: "craveability." The phrase was a hit with the audience and panelists alike. Sometime later in the discussion, Seiber remarked, "designers strive to apply craveability to products, and I do so for restaurants in my case." Craveabilty is also very applicable to interaction design. Creating straightforward and smooth workflows for users of Oracle Applications is a primary goal for my colleagues. We want our users to really enjoy working with our products where it makes them more efficient and better at their jobs. That's our "craveability." Patanjali Venkatacharya asked the panel, "if a design's "craveability" appeals to some cultures but not to others, then what is the impact to the food or product design process?" Rohn stated that "taste is part nature and part nurture" and that the design must take the full context of a product's usage into consideration. Kessler added, "good design is about understanding the context" that the experience necessitates. Seiber remarked how important seat comfort is for diners and how the quality of seating will add so much to the complete dining experience. Sometimes if these non-food factors are not well executed, they can also take away from an otherwise pleasant dining experience. Kessler recounted a time when he was dining at a restaurant that actually had very good food, but the photographs hanging on all the walls did not fit in with the overall décor and created a negative overall dining experience. While the tastiness of the food is critical to a restaurant's success, it is a captivating complete user experience, as in interaction design, which will keep customers coming back and ultimately making the restaurant a hit. Figure 2. Patanjali Venkatacharya enjoyed the Sardinian flatbread salad. As a surprise Chef Powers brought out a signature dish from Shaun's restaurant for all the panelists to sample and critique. The Sardinian flatbread dish showcased Atlanta's taste for fresh and local produce and cheese at its finest as a salad served on a crispy flavorful flat bread. Hardeman said it could be photographed from any angle, a high compliment coming from a food stylist. Seiber really enjoyed the colors that the dish brought together and thought it would be served very well in a casual restaurant on a summer's day. The panel really appreciated the taste and quality of the different components and how the rosemary brought all the flavors together. Seiber remarked that "a lot of effort goes into the appearance of simplicity." Rohn indicated that the same notion holds true with software user interface design. A tremendous amount of work goes into crafting straightforward interfaces, including user research, prototyping, design iterations, and usability studies. Design criticism for food and software interfaces clearly share many similarities. Both areas value expert opinions and user feedback. Both areas understand the importance of great design needing to work well in its context. Last but not least, both food and interaction design criticism value "craveability" and how having users excited about experiencing and enjoying the designs is an important goal. Now if we can just improve the taste of software user interfaces, people may choose to dine on their enterprise applications over a fresh organic salad.

    Read the article

  • What Makes a Good Design Critic? CHI 2010 Panel Review

    - by Applications User Experience
    Author: Daniel Schwartz, Senior Interaction Designer, Oracle Applications User Experience Oracle Applications UX Chief Evangelist Patanjali Venkatacharya organized and moderated an innovative and stimulating panel discussion titled "What Makes a Good Design Critic? Food Design vs. Product Design Criticism" at CHI 2010, the annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. The panelists included Janice Rohn, VP of User Experience at Experian; Tami Hardeman, a food stylist; Ed Seiber, a restaurant architect and designer; Jonathan Kessler, a food critic and writer at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution; and Larry Powers, Chef de Cuisine at Shaun's restaurant in Atlanta, Georgia. Building off the momentum of his highly acclaimed panel at CHI 2009 on what interaction design can learn from food design (for which I was on the other side as a panelist), Venkatacharya brought together new people with different roles in the restaurant and software interaction design fields. The session was also quite delicious -- but more on that later. Criticism, as it applies to food and product or interaction design, was the tasty topic for this forum and showed that strong parallels exist between food and interaction design criticism. Figure 1. The panelists in discussion: (left to right) Janice Rohn, Ed Seiber, Tami Hardeman, and Jonathan Kessler. The panelists had great insights to share from their respective fields, and they enthusiastically discussed as if they were at a casual collegial dinner. Jonathan Kessler stated that he prefers to have one professional critic's opinion in general than a large sampling of customers, however, "Web sites like Yelp get users excited by the collective approach. People are attracted to things desired by so many." Janice Rohn added that this collective desire was especially true for users of consumer products. Ed Seiber remarked that while people looked to the popular view for their target tastes and product choices, "professional critics like John [Kessler] still hold a big weight on public opinion." Chef Powers indicated that chefs take in feedback from all sources, adding, "word of mouth is very powerful. We also look heavily at the sales of the dishes to see what's moving; what's selling and thus successful." Hearing this discussion validates our design work at Oracle in that we listen to our users (our diners) and industry feedback (our critics) to ensure an optimal user experience of our products. Rohn considers that restaurateur Danny Meyer's book, Setting the Table: The Transforming Power of Hospitality in Business, which is about creating successful restaurant experiences, has many applicable parallels to user experience design. Meyer actually argues that the customer is not always right, but that "they must always feel heard." Seiber agreed, but noted "customers are not designers," and while designers need to listen to customer feedback, it is the designer's job to synthesize it. Seiber feels it's the critic's job to point out when something is missing or not well-prioritized. In interaction design, our challenges are quite similar, if not parallel. Software tasks are like puzzles that are in search of a solution on how to be best completed. As a food stylist, Tami Hardeman has the demanding and challenging task of presenting food to be as delectable as can be. To present food in its best light requires a lot of creativity and insight into consumer tastes. It's no doubt then that this former fashion stylist came up with the ultimate catch phrase to capture the emotion that clients want to draw from their users: "craveability." The phrase was a hit with the audience and panelists alike. Sometime later in the discussion, Seiber remarked, "designers strive to apply craveability to products, and I do so for restaurants in my case." Craveabilty is also very applicable to interaction design. Creating straightforward and smooth workflows for users of Oracle Applications is a primary goal for my colleagues. We want our users to really enjoy working with our products where it makes them more efficient and better at their jobs. That's our "craveability." Patanjali Venkatacharya asked the panel, "if a design's "craveability" appeals to some cultures but not to others, then what is the impact to the food or product design process?" Rohn stated that "taste is part nature and part nurture" and that the design must take the full context of a product's usage into consideration. Kessler added, "good design is about understanding the context" that the experience necessitates. Seiber remarked how important seat comfort is for diners and how the quality of seating will add so much to the complete dining experience. Sometimes if these non-food factors are not well executed, they can also take away from an otherwise pleasant dining experience. Kessler recounted a time when he was dining at a restaurant that actually had very good food, but the photographs hanging on all the walls did not fit in with the overall décor and created a negative overall dining experience. While the tastiness of the food is critical to a restaurant's success, it is a captivating complete user experience, as in interaction design, which will keep customers coming back and ultimately making the restaurant a hit. Figure 2. Patnajali Venkatacharya enjoyed the Sardian flatbread salad. As a surprise Chef Powers brought out a signature dish from Shaun's restaurant for all the panelists to sample and critique. The Sardinian flatbread dish showcased Atlanta's taste for fresh and local produce and cheese at its finest as a salad served on a crispy flavorful flat bread. Hardeman said it could be photographed from any angle, a high compliment coming from a food stylist. Seiber really enjoyed the colors that the dish brought together and thought it would be served very well in a casual restaurant on a summer's day. The panel really appreciated the taste and quality of the different components and how the rosemary brought all the flavors together. Seiber remarked that "a lot of effort goes into the appearance of simplicity." Rohn indicated that the same notion holds true with software user interface design. A tremendous amount of work goes into crafting straightforward interfaces, including user research, prototyping, design iterations, and usability studies. Design criticism for food and software interfaces clearly share many similarities. Both areas value expert opinions and user feedback. Both areas understand the importance of great design needing to work well in its context. Last but not least, both food and interaction design criticism value "craveability" and how having users excited about experiencing and enjoying the designs is an important goal. Now if we can just improve the taste of software user interfaces, people may choose to dine on their enterprise applications over a fresh organic salad.

    Read the article

  • How to do fixed price quote for design sessions?

    - by Shaul
    Normally when I do a system for a customer, I do design sessions on an hourly rate and then come out with a fixed price quotation for the full system development. Now this customer has thrown me a curveball: he doesn't want an hourly rate for design, either - he wants me to quote a fixed price to do all the design, too! Not that he's trying to cheap out, but he doesn't want to be in a situation where the longer design stretches out, the more he has to pay - and I can understand that. For the business layer it was actually not too difficult to work with this, because from his original functional spec I got a good idea of what the core business objects were, and in our design agreement I defined several objects which would be covered by a fixed design price; if any new non-trivial objects were discovered, they would be considered variances, and those would be billed on an hourly rate. So far so good. But when it comes to the UI, things start getting a lot more woolly. How many screens will there be? Don't know yet. What's going to be on each screen? Don't know yet. All we know is that it's a "dashboard" type of system, and there will be a lot of visual reporting involved e.g. gauges, graphs, etc. So maybe make it fixed price per screen design? Not a great definition; he might say that everything is going to be on one screen. Maybe a price per "visual report" design, including ability to slice & dice? Again not so easy - it might be that the entire system is just one report, and all the intelligence is going to go into how to present that segmentation. Anyone have any ideas how to do a fixed price quotation for a UI design like this?

    Read the article

  • I'm creating my own scalable, rapid prototyping web server. How should I design it?

    - by Mike Willliams
    I'm going to create my own web server that focuses on scalability, rapid prototyping and the use of JavaScript as the server's scripting language, much like node.js. It will use a Model-View-Controller design pattern so a web application can support more concurrent users just by adding hardware -- and not having to redesign the software. Basically, I'm aiming to produce a framework that allows for fast and easy development of cloud applications without the need to write lots of boiler plate code. I've got some questions about this... How hard will it be to put MySQL in the cloud? How could I go about implementing this and make the resulting product free? Will I have to write my own engine or modify an existing one, if I do what should I watch out for? To make this scalable I need to adjust from one server to hundreds of servers this creates the requirement for the servers to be load balancing, how should I do this? If I balance based on the work load per server I would need gateway to handle all the incoming requests. Is it the right idea to have all the servers check into the gateway and update there status. By having the servers run through a gateway if the gateway dies all the incoming requests are ignored. I'm thinking that having all the servers maintain a list of each other, or at least a few I could rebuild the list of servers and establish a new gateway. Is it worth it? Or should I have a backup gateway that could switch out? Should I let the user choose? How should I pick which server handles the database and which handles the page serving? Should I spread the database so that queries are preformed on multiple servers? Which would theoretically improve performance. The servers would need to mirror the database at least once so that if a server goes down the database isn't corrupted. So this brings up writing another question, should I broadcast SQL queries so that all the servers can take a bit of the work load? If I do it that way wouldn't a query clog up the network so that other queries couldn't be preformed? What are my alternatives? Finally, is there a free solution already out there that might need a little modification that suits my needs?

    Read the article

  • Class Design -- Multiple Calls from One Method or One Call from Multiple Methods?

    - by Andrew
    I've been working on some code recently that interfaces with a CMS we use and it's presented me with a question on class design that I think is applicable in a number of situations. Essentially, what I am doing is extracting information from the CMS and transforming this information into objects that I can use programatically for other purposes. This consists of two steps: Retrieve the data from the CMS (we have a DAL that I use, so this is essentially just specifying what data from the CMS I want--no connection logic or anything like that) Map the parsed data to my own [C#] objects There are basically two ways I can approach this: One call from multiple methods public void MainMethodWhereIDoStuff() { IEnumerable<MyObject> myObjects = GetMyObjects(); // Do other stuff with myObjects } private static IEnumerable<MyObject> GetMyObjects() { IEnumerable<CmsDataItem> cmsDataItems = GetCmsDataItems(); List<MyObject> mappedObjects = new List<MyObject>(); // do stuff to map the CmsDataItems to MyObjects return mappedObjects; } private static IEnumerable<CmsDataItem> GetCmsDataItems() { List<CmsDataItem> cmsDataItems = new List<CmsDataItem>(); // do stuff to get the CmsDataItems I want return cmsDataItems; } Multiple calls from one method public void MainMethodWhereIDoStuff() { IEnumerable<CmsDataItem> cmsDataItems = GetCmsDataItems(); IEnumerable<MyObject> myObjects = GetMyObjects(cmsDataItems); // do stuff with myObjects } private static IEnumerable<MyObject> GetMyObjects(IEnumerable<CmsDataItem> itemsToMap) { // ... } private static IEnumerable<CmsDataItem> GetCmsDataItems() { // ... } I am tempted to say that the latter is better than the former, as GetMyObjects does not depend on GetCmsDataItems, and it is explicit in the calling method the steps that are executed to retrieve the objects (I'm concerned that the first approach is kind of an object-oriented version of spaghetti code). On the other hand, the two helper methods are never going to be used outside of the class, so I'm not sure if it really matters whether one depends on the other. Furthermore, I like the fact that in the first approach the objects can be retrieved from one line-- most likely anyone working with the main method doesn't care how the objects are retrieved, they just need to retrieve the objects, and the "daisy chained" helper methods hide the exact steps needed to retrieve them (in practice, I actually have a few more methods but am still able to retrieve the object collection I want in one line). Is one of these methods right and the other wrong? Or is it simply a matter of preference or context dependent?

    Read the article

  • How to overcome shortcomings in reporting from EAV database?

    - by David Archer
    The major shortcomings with Entity-Attribute-Value database designs in SQL all seem to be related to being able to query and report on the data efficiently and quickly. Most of the information I read on the subject warn against implementing EAV due to these problems and the commonality of querying/reporting for almost all applications. I am currently designing a system where almost all the fields necessary for data storage are not known at design/compile time and are defined by the end-user of the system. EAV seems like a good fit for this requirement but due to the problems I've read about, I am hesitant in implementing it as there are also some pretty heavy reporting requirements for this system as well. I think I've come up with a way around this but would like to pose the question to the SO community. Given that typical normalized database (OLTP) still isn't always the best option for running reports, a good practice seems to be having a "reporting" database (OLAP) where the data from the normalized database is copied to, indexed extensively, and possibly denormalized for easier querying. Could the same idea be used to work around the shortcomings of an EAV design? The main downside I see are the increased complexity of transferring the data from the EAV database to reporting as you may end up having to alter the tables in the reporting database as new fields are defined in the EAV database. But that is hardly impossible and seems to be an acceptable tradeoff for the increased flexibility given by the EAV design. This downside also exists if I use a non-SQL data store (i.e. CouchDB or similar) for the main data storage since all the standard reporting tools are expecting a SQL backend to query against. Do the issues with EAV systems mostly go away if you have a seperate reporting database for querying? EDIT: Thanks for the comments so far. One of the important things about the system I'm working on it that I'm really only talking about using EAV for one of the entities, not everything in the system. The whole gist of the system is to be able to pull data from multiple disparate sources that are not known ahead of time and crunch the data to come up with some "best known" data about a particular entity. So every "field" I'm dealing with is multi-valued and I'm also required to track history for each. The normalized design for this ends up being 1 table per field which makes querying it kind of painful anyway. Here are the table schemas and sample data I'm looking at (obviously changed from what I'm working on but I think it illustrates the point well): EAV Tables Person ------------------- - Id - Name - ------------------- - 123 - Joe Smith - ------------------- Person_Value ------------------------------------------------------------------- - PersonId - Source - Field - Value - EffectiveDate - ------------------------------------------------------------------- - 123 - CIA - HomeAddress - 123 Cherry Ln - 2010-03-26 - - 123 - DMV - HomeAddress - 561 Stoney Rd - 2010-02-15 - - 123 - FBI - HomeAddress - 676 Lancas Dr - 2010-03-01 - ------------------------------------------------------------------- Reporting Table Person_Denormalized ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Id - Name - HomeAddress - HomeAddress_Confidence - HomeAddress_EffectiveDate - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 123 - Joe Smith - 123 Cherry Ln - 0.713 - 2010-03-26 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Normalized Design Person ------------------- - Id - Name - ------------------- - 123 - Joe Smith - ------------------- Person_HomeAddress ------------------------------------------------------ - PersonId - Source - Value - Effective Date - ------------------------------------------------------ - 123 - CIA - 123 Cherry Ln - 2010-03-26 - - 123 - DMV - 561 Stoney Rd - 2010-02-15 - - 123 - FBI - 676 Lancas Dr - 2010-03-01 - ------------------------------------------------------ The "Confidence" field here is generated using logic that cannot be expressed easily (if at all) using SQL so my most common operation besides inserting new values will be pulling ALL data about a person for all fields so I can generate the record for the reporting table. This is actually easier in the EAV model as I can do a single query. In the normalized design, I end up having to do 1 query per field to avoid a massive cartesian product from joining them all together.

    Read the article

  • Help with 2-part question on ASP.NET MVC and Custom Security Design

    - by JustAProgrammer
    I'm using ASP.NET MVC and I am trying to separate a lot of my logic. Eventually, this application will be pretty big. It's basically a SaaS app that I need to allow for different kinds of clients to access. I have a two part question; the first deals with my general design and the second deals with how to utilize in ASP.NET MVC Primarily, there will initially be an ASP.NET MVC "client" front-end and there will be a set of web-services for third parties to interact with (perhaps mobile, etc). I realize I could have the ASP.NET MVC app interact just through the Web Service but I think that is unnecessary overhead. So, I am creating an API that will essentially be a DLL that the Web App and the Web Services will utilize. The API consists of the main set of business logic and Data Transfer Objects, etc. (So, this includes methods like CreateCustomer, EditProduct, etc for example) Also, my permissions requirements are a little complicated. I can't really use a straight Roles system as I need to have some fine-grained permissions (but all permissions are positive rights). So, I don't think I can really use the ASP.NET Roles/Membership system or if I can it seems like I'd be doing more work than rolling my own. I've used Membership before and for this one I think I'd rather roll my own. Both the Web App and Web Services will need to keep security as a concern. So, my design is kind of like this: Each method in the API will need to verify the security of the caller In the Web App, each "page" ("action" in MVC speak) will also check the user's permissions (So, don't present the user with the "Add Customer" button if the user does not have that right but also whenever the API receives AddCustomer(), check the security too) I think the Web Service really needs the checking in the DLL because it may not always be used in some kind of pre-authenticated context (like using Session/Cookies in a Web App); also having the security checks in the API means I don't really HAVE TO check it in other places if I'm on a mobile (say iPhone) and don't want to do all kinds of checking on the client However, in the Web App I think there will be some duplication of work since the Web App checks the user's security before presenting the user with options, which is ok, but I was thinking of a way to avoid this duplication by allowing the Web App to tell the API not check the security; while the Web Service would always want security to be verified Is this a good method? If not, what's better? If so, what's a good way of implementing this. I was thinking of doing this: In the API, I would have two functions for each action: // Here, "Credential" objects are just something I made up public void AddCustomer(string customerName, Credential credential , bool checkSecurity) { if(checkSecurity) { if(Has_Rights_To_Add_Customer(credential)) // made up for clarity { AddCustomer(customerName); } else // throw an exception or somehow present an error } else AddCustomer(customerName); } public void AddCustomer(string customerName) { // actual logic to add the customer into the DB or whatever // Would it be good for this method to verify that the caller is the Web App // through some method? } So, is this a good design or should I do something differently? My next question is that clearly it doesn't seem like I can really use [Authorize ...] for determining if a user has the permissions to do something. In fact, one action might depend on a variety of permissions and the View might hide or show certain options depending on the permission. What's the best way to do this? Should I have some kind of PermissionSet object that the user carries around throughout the Web App in Session or whatever and the MVC Action method would check if that user can use that Action and then the View will have some ViewData or whatever where it checks the various permissions to do Hide/Show?

    Read the article

  • WinForm Design View Error

    - by Ramiz Uddin
    I'm getting the following error on form design: Hide Call Stack at EnvDTE80.CodeModel2.DotNetNameFromLanguageSpecific(String LanguageName) at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.VSCodeDomParser.CodeTypeDeclarationFromCodeClass(CodeClass vsClass) at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.VSCodeDomParser.OnNamespacePopulateTypes(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.CodeDom.CodeNamespace.get_Types() at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.VSCodeDomParser.Parse(TextReader codeStream) at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.MergedCodeDomParser.System.CodeDom.Compiler.ICodeParser.Parse(TextReader stream) at System.CodeDom.Compiler.CodeDomProvider.Parse(TextReader codeStream) at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Shell.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.CodeDomDocDataAdapter.get_CompileUnit() at Microsoft.VisualStudio.Design.Serialization.CodeDom.VSCodeDomDesignerLoader.PerformLoad(IDesignerSerializationManager serializationManager) at System.ComponentModel.Design.Serialization.BasicDesignerLoader.BeginLoad(IDesignerLoaderHost host) Need help!

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for Single-Page Web Application Design?

    - by DaveDev
    My view is that unless you need to change the basic structure of the user interface, you should not have to reload the page at all for any user interactions. I'd like to approach my next ASP.NET MVC project with this in mind. Can anyone suggest any principles, patterns or practices* I should consider? Excellent book, btw. Still trying to wrap my head around some of the concepts though. I thought a question like this would help link the theory to a practical design. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Working with PHP and MySQL - need a good and secure design with OO design

    - by Andrew
    I am new to PHP- first time developer. I am working on my web application and it is nearly done; nevertheless, most of my sql was done directly via code using direct mysql requests. This is the way I approached it: In classes_db.php I declared the db settings and created methods that I use to open and close DB connections. I declare those objects on my regular pages: class classes_db { public $dbserver = 'server; public $dbusername = 'user'; public $dbpassword = 'pass'; public $dbname = 'db'; function openDb() { $dbhandle = mysql_connect($this->dbserver, $this->dbusername, $this->dbpassword); if (!$dbhandle) { die('Could not connect: ' . mysql_error()); } $selected = mysql_select_db($this->dbname, $dbhandle) or die("Could not select the database"); return $dbhandle; } function closeDb($con) { mysql_close($con); } } On my regular page, I do this: <?php require 'classes_db.php'; session_start(); //create instance of the DB class $db = new classes_db(); //get dbhandle $dbhandle = $db->openDb(); //process query $result = mysql_query("update user set username = '" . $usernameFromForm . "' where iduser= " . $_SESSION['user']->iduser); //close the connection if (isset($dbhandle)) { $db->closeDb($dbhandle); } ?> My questions is: how to do it right and make it OO and secure? I know that I need incorporate prepared queries- how to do it the best way? Please provide some code

    Read the article

  • MVC - Cocoa interface - Cocoa Design pattern book

    - by Idan
    So I started reading this book: http://www.amazon.com/Cocoa-Design-Patterns-Erik-Buck/dp/0321535022 On chapter 2 it explains about the MVC design pattern and gives and example which I need some clarification to. The simple example shows a view with the following fields: hourlyRate, WorkHours, Standarthours , salary. The example is devided into 3 parts : View - contains some text fiels and a table (the table contains a list of employees' data). Controller - comprised of NSArrayController class (contains an array of MyEmployee) Model - MyEmployee class which describes an employee. MyEmployee class has one method which return the salary according to the calculation logic, and attributes in accordance with the view UI controls. MyEmployee inherits from NSManagedObject. Few things i'm not sure of : 1. Inside the MyEmplpyee class implemenation file, the calculation method gets the class attributes using sentence like " [[self valueForKey:@"hourlyRate"] floatValue];" Howevern, inside the header there is no data member named hourlyRate or any of the view fields. I'm not quite sure how does it work, and how it gets the value from the right view field. (does it have to be the same name as the field name in the view). maybe the conncetion is made somehow using the Interface builder and was not shown in the book ? and more important: 2. how does it seperate the view from the model ? let's say ,as the book implies might happen, I decide one day to remove one of the fields in the view. as far as I understand, that means changing the way the salary method works in MyEmplpyee (cause we have one field less) , and removing one attribute from the same calss. So how is that separate the View from the Model if changing one reflect on the other ? I guess I get something wrong... Any comments ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Design Patterns Recommendation for Filtering Option

    - by Tarik
    Hi people, I am thinking to create a filter object which filters and delete everything like html tags from a context. But I want it to be independent which means the design pattern I can apply will help me to add more filters in the future without effecting the current codes. I thought Abstract Factory but it seems it ain't gonna work out the way I want. So maybe builder but it looks same. I don't know I am kinda confused, some one please recommend me a design pattern which can solve my problem but before that let me elaborate the problem a little bit. Lets say I have a class which has Description field or property what ever. And I need filters which remove the things I want from this Description property. So whenever I apply the filter I can add more filter in underlying tier. So instead of re-touching the Description field, I can easily add more filters and all the filters will run for Description field and delete whatever they are supposed to delete from the Description context. I hope I could describe my problem. I think some of you ran into the same situation before. Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • iPhone User Interface Design

    - by Blaenk
    Hey guys, I've just had a nagging question for a while regarding iPhone app user interfaces. For example, consider WeightBot's User Interface. I am wondering, how are most of these user interfaces created? In general, of course. Is there a way to simply design controls (that is, the images) in a program like Photoshop, then use that 'skin' for controls in UIKit? I realize that there are some controls that are probably created by the programmer (custom controls), but I'm referring to the ready-made ones that come in UIKit. In other words, is the concept similar to 'splicing' web site designs? Where a designer draws out the design of the website in something like Photoshop, and then it is cut up into pieces which can be applied to form the actual website? I know this can be done for UIButtons, can this also be done for other controls, and is this how it is usually done? Or perhaps this is done with Core Animation? I've heard this from time to time, so does this mean that the User Interfaces are 'hard-coded'? Or is Core Animation only use for the 'effects', such as applying the glowing effect to the numbers in WeightBot? If there are any resources you can point me to I would really appreciate it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • “if” statement vs OO Design - 2

    - by hilal
    I encountered similar problem “if” statement vs OO Design - 1 but it is slightly different. Here is the problem that open the popup (different objects/popups) onValueChange of listbox Popup1 p1; // different objects Popup2 p2; // different objects Popup3 p3; ... listbox.add("p1"); listbox.add("p2"); listbox.add("p3"); ... listbox.addChangeHandler() { if(getSelectedItem().equals("p1")){ p1 = new Popup1(); p1.show(); } else if() {...} .... } I don't want to write "if" that if p1 then p1 = new Popup1(); p1.center(); How I can handle this situation? Any design-pattern? Here is my solution but it is so costly map() { map.put("p1", new Popup1()); map.put("p2", new Popup2()); map.put("p3", new Popup3()); } onValueChange() { map.get(selectedItem).show(); } One drawback is initialization all the popups. but it is require only when valueChange

    Read the article

  • Correct OOP design without getters?

    - by kane77
    I recently read that getters/setters are evil and I have to say it makes sense, yet when I started learning OOP one of the first things I learned was "Encapsulate your fields" so I learned to create class give it some fields, create getters, setters for them and create constructor where I initialize these fields. And every time some other class needs to manipulate this object (or for instance display it) I pass it the object and it manipulate it using getters/setters. I can see problems with this approach. But how to do it right? For instance displaying/rendering object that is "data" class - let's say Person, that has name and date of birth. Should the class have method for displaying the object where some Renderer would be passed as an argument? Wouldn't that violate principle that class should have only one purpose (in this case store state) so it should not care about presentation of this object. Can you suggest some good resources where best practices in OOP design are presented? I'm planning to start a project in my spare time and I want it to be my learning project in correct OOP design..

    Read the article

  • Best Practice, objects design ASP.NET MVC

    - by DoomStone
    Hello Stackoverflow I have a code design question that have been torbeling me for a while, you see I’m doing a refactoring of my website Cosplay Denmark, a site where cospalyers can upload images of them self in their costumes. The original site was done in php, Zend MVC, but my refactoring is being done in ASP.NET MVC 2. If you take the site http://www.cosplaydanmark.dk/Costumes/ (You can switch to English in the left column (Sprog)) Here you see a list of all the anime’s we have on the site with images, we show the name, how many different characters and how many images there are under this anime. http://www.cosplaydanmark.dk/Costumes/Bleach If you click on an anime will you get a list of characters within the given anime which we have images in, here do we show the character name, how many galleries and how many images. http://www.cosplaydanmark.dk/Costumes/Bleach/Ichigo_Kurosaki/ If you click on the character name, will you get a list of the galleries under the given character in the given anime. Here we have some information about the gallery, such as image count. http://www.cosplaydanmark.dk/Costumes/Bleach/Ichigo_Kurosaki/Admi/ Should you click the gallery do you get a list of the images in the gallery. My database look like this at the moment. As you can might imagine there are a lot of different query’s to create the site, on the first site I need to do a select on the on the “animes” table and for each result, I need to do a count select on characters and galleries. My plan to create this will be one of the following Where the IList, would be a lazy load list. But I can’t decide what would be the best solution for this would be, also if there is a better way of doing this. My priority is to have good performance with a minimum lose of features and code upkeep. I’m using a service pattern with a linq to sql repository. My design is not absolute, I’m willing to change it if it could increase performance :D I hope that I have describe my question good enough for you to understand what I mean, but ask away if there are anything I have missed.

    Read the article

  • C# Item system design approach, should I use abstract classes, interfaces or virutals?

    - by vexe
    I'm working on a Resident Evil 1/2/3/0/Remake type of game. Currently I've done a big part of the inventory system (here's a link if you wanna see my inventory, pretty outdated, added a lot of features and made a lot of enhancements) Now I'm thinking about how to approach the items system, If you've played any Resident Evil game or any of its likes you should be familiar with what I'm trying to achieve. Here's a very simple category I made for the items: So you have different items, with different operations you could perform on them, there are usable items that you could use, like for example herbs and first aid kits that 'using' them would affect your health, keys to unlock doors, and equipable items that you could 'equip' like weapons. Also, you can 'combine' two items together to get new one, like for example mixing a green and red herb would give you a new type of herb, or combining a lighter with a paper, would give you a burnt paper, or ammo with a gun, would reload the gun or something. etc. You know the usual RE drill. Not all items are 'transformable', in that, for example: lighter + paper = burnt paper (it's the paper that 'transforms' to burnt paper and not the lighter, the lighter is not transformable it will remain as it is) green herb + red herb = newHerb1 (both herbs will vanish and transform to this new type of herb) ammo + gun = reload gun (ammo state will remain as it is, it won't change but it will just decrease, nothing will happen to the gun it just gets reloaded) Also a key note to remember is that you can't just combine items randomly, each item has a 'mating' item(s). So to sum up, different items, and different operations on them. The question is, how to approach this, design-wise? I've been learning about interfaces, but it just doesn't quite get into my head, I mean, why not just use classes with the good old inheritance? I know the technical details of interfaces and that the cool thing about them is that they don't require an inheritance chain, but I just can't see how to use them properly, that is, if they were the right thing to use here. So should I go with just classes and inheritance? just like in the tree I showed you? or should I think more about how to use interfaces? (IUsable, IEquipable, ITransformable) - why not just use classes UsableItem, Equipable item, TransformableItem? I want something that won't give me headaches in the long run, something resilient/flexible to future changes. I'm OK using classes, but I smell something better here. The way I'm thinking is to possibly use both inheritance and interfaces, so that you have a branch like this: item - equipable - weapon. but then again, the weapon has methods like 'reload' 'examine' 'equip' some of them 'combine' so I'm thinking to make weapon implement ICombinable?... not all items get used the same way, using herbs will increase your health, using a key will open a door, so IUsable maybe? Should I use a big database (XML for example) for all the items, items names, mates, nRowsReq, nColsReq, etc? Thanks so much for your answers in advanced, note that demo 3 is coming after I'm done with items :D

    Read the article

  • Java - Is this a bad design pattern?

    - by Walter White
    Hi all, In our application, I have seen code written like this: User.java (User entity) public class User { protected String firstName; protected String lastName; ... getters/setters (regular POJO) } UserSearchCommand { protected List<User> users; protected int currentPage; protected int sortColumnIndex; protected SortOder sortOrder; // the current user we're editing, if at all protected User user; public String getFirstName() {return(user.getFirstName());} public String getLastName() {return(user.getLastName());} } Now, from my experience, this pattern or anti-pattern looks bad to me. For one, we're mixing several concerns together. While they're all user-related, it deviates from typical POJO design. If we're going to go this route, then shouldn't we do this instead? UserSearchCommand { protected List<User> users; protected int currentPage; protected int sortColumnIndex; protected SortOder sortOrder; // the current user we're editing, if at all protected User user; public User getUser() {return(user);} } Simply return the user object, and then we can call whatever methods on it as we wish? Since this is quite different from typical bean development, JSR 303, bean validation doesn't work for this model and we have to write validators for every bean. Does anyone else see anything wrong with this design pattern or am I just being picky as a developer? Walter

    Read the article

  • Database design for invoices, invoice lines & revisions

    - by FreshCode
    I'm designing the 2nd major iteration of a relational database for a franchise's CRM (with lots of refactoring) and I need help on the best database design practices for storing job invoices and invoice lines with a strong audit trail of any changes made to each invoice. Current schema Invoices Table InvoiceId (int) // Primary key JobId (int) StatusId (tinyint) // Pending, Paid or Deleted UserId (int) // auditing user Reference (nvarchar(256)) // unique natural string key with invoice number Date (datetime) Comments (nvarchar(MAX)) InvoiceLines Table LineId (int) // Primary key InvoiceId (int) // related to Invoices above Quantity (decimal(9,4)) Title (nvarchar(512)) Comment (nvarchar(512)) UnitPrice (smallmoney) Revision schema InvoiceRevisions Table RevisionId (int) // Primary key InvoiceId (int) JobId (int) StatusId (tinyint) // Pending, Paid or Deleted UserId (int) // auditing user Reference (nvarchar(256)) // unique natural string key with invoice number Date (datetime) Total (smallmoney) Schema design considerations 1. Is it sensible to store an invoice's Paid or Pending status? All payments received for an invoice are stored in a Payments table (eg. Cash, Credit Card, Cheque, Bank Deposit). Is it meaningful to store a "Paid" status in the Invoices table if all the income related to a given job's invoices can be inferred from the Payments table? 2. How to keep track of invoice line item revisions? I can track revisions to an invoice by storing status changes along with the invoice total and the auditing user in an invoice revision table (see InvoiceRevisions above), but keeping track of an invoice line revision table feels hard to maintain. Thoughts? 3. Tax How should I incorporate sales tax (or 14% VAT in SA) when storing invoice data?

    Read the article

  • Database design for credit based purchases

    - by FreshCode
    I need an elegant way to implement credit-based purchases for an online store with a small variety of products which can be purchased using virtual credit or real currency. Alternatively, products could only be priced in credits. Previous work I have implemented credit-based purchasing before using different product types (eg. Credit, Voucher or Music) with post-order processing to assign purchased credit to users in the form of real currency, which could subsequently be used to discount future orders' charge totals. This worked fairly well as a makeshift solution, but did not succeed in disconnecting the virtual currency from the real currency, which is what I'd like to do, since spending credits is psychologically easier for customers than spending real currency. Design I need guidance on designing the database correctly with support for the simultaneous bulk purchase of credits at a discount along with real currency products. Alternatively, should all products be priced in credits and only credit have a real currency value? Existing Database Design Partial Products table: ProductId Title Type UnitPrice SalePrice Partial Orders table: OrderId UserId (related to Users table, not shown) Status Value Total Partial OrderItems table (similar to CartItems table): OrderItemId OrderId (related to Orders table) ProductId (related to Products table) Quantity UnitPrice SalePrice Prospective UserCredits table: CreditId UserId (related to Users table, not shown) Value (+/- value. Summed over time to determine saldo.) Date I'm using ASP.NET MVC and LINQ-to-SQL on a SQL Server database.

    Read the article

  • Database design for sharing photos site?

    - by javaLearner.java
    I am using php and mysql. If I want to do a sharing photos website, whats the best database design for upload and display photos. This is what I have in mind: domain: |_> photos |_> user Logged in user will upload photo in [http://www.domain.com/user/upload.php] The photos are stored in filesystems, and the path-to-photos stored in database. So, in my photos folder would be like: photos/userA/subfolders+photos, photos/userB/subfolders+photos, photos/userC/subfolders+photos etc Public/others people may view his photo in: [http://www.domain.com/photos/user/?photoid=123] where 123 is the photoid, from there, I will query from database to fetch the path and display the image. My questions: Whats the best database design for photo-sharing website (like flickr)? Will there be any problems if I keep creating new folder in "photos" folder. What if hundreds of thousands users registered? Whats the best practices What size of photos should I keep? Currently I only stored thumbnail (100x100) and (max) 1600x1200 px photos. What others things I should take note when developing photos-sharing website?

    Read the article

  • Android Multiple Handlers Design Question

    - by Soumya Simanta
    This question is related to an existing question I asked. I though I'll ask a new question instead of replying back to the other question. Cannot "comment" on my previous question because of a word limit. Marc wrote - I've more than one Handlers in an Activity." Why? If you do not want a complicated handleMessage() method, then use post() (on Handler or View) to break the logic up into individual Runnables. Multiple Handlers makes me nervous. I'm new to Android. Is having multiple handlers in a single activity a bad design ? I'm new to Android. My question is - is having multiple handlers in a single activity a bad design ? Here is the sketch of my current implementation. I've a mapActivity that creates a data thread (a UDP socket that listens for data). My first handler is responsible for sending data from the data thread to the activity. On the map I've a bunch of "dynamic" markers that are refreshed frequently. Some of these markers are video markers i.e., if the user clicks a video marker, I add a ViewView that extends a android.opengl.GLSurfaceView to my map activity and display video on this new vide. I use my second handler to send information about the marker that the user tapped on ItemizedOverlay onTap(int index) method. The user can close the video view by tapping on the video view. I use my third handler for this. I would appreciate if people can tell me what's wrong with this approach and suggest better ways to implement this. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Movies recommendation engine conceptual database design

    - by Supyxy
    I am working at an movie recommendations engine and i'm facing a DB design issue. My actual database looks like this: MOVIES [ID,TITLE] KEYWORDS_TABLE [ID,KEY_ID] - where ID is Foreign Key for MOVIES.id and KEY_ID is a key for a text keywords table This is not the entire DB, but i showed here what's important for my problem. I have about 50,000 movies and about 1,3 milion keywords correlations, and basically my algorithm consists in extracting all the who have the same keywords with a given movie, then ordering them by the number of keywords correlations. For example i looked for a movie similar to 'Cast away' and it returned 'Six days and six nights' because it had the most keywords correlations (4 keywords): Island Airplane crash Stranded Pilot The algorithm is based on more factors, but this one is the most important and the most difficult for the approach. Basically what i do now is getting all the movies that have at least one keyword similar to the given movie and then ordering them by other factors which are not important for a moment. There wouldn't be any problem if there weren't so many records, a query lasts in many cases up to 10-20 seconds and some of them return even over 5000 movies. Someone already helped me on here (thanks Mark Byers) with optimizing the query but that's not enough because it takes too longer SELECT DISTINCT M.title FROM keywords_table K1 JOIN keywords_table K2 ON K2.key_id = K1.key_id JOIN movies M ON K2.id = M.id WHERE K1.id = 4 So i thought it would be better if i pre-made those lists with movies recommendations for each movie, but i'm not sure how to design the tables.. whatever is it a good idea or how would you take this approach?

    Read the article

  • Simplifying Testing through design considerations while utilizing dependency injection

    - by Adam Driscoll
    We are a few months into a green-field project to rework the Logic and Business layers of our product. By utilizing MEF (dependency injection) we have achieved high levels of code coverage and I believe that we have a pretty solid product. As we have been working through some of the more complex logic I have found it increasingly difficult to unit test. We are utilizing the CompositionContainer to query for types required by these complex algorithms. My unit tests are sometimes difficult to follow due to the lengthy mock object setup process that must take place, just right, to allow for certain circumstances to be verified. My unit tests often take me longer to write than the code that I'm trying to test. I realize this is not only an issue with dependency injection but with design as a whole. Is poor method design or lack of composition to blame for my overly complex tests? I've tried base classing tests, creating commonly used mock objects and ensuring that I utilize the container as much as possible to ease this issue but my tests always end up quite complex and hard to debug. What are some tips that you've seen to keep such tests concise, readable, and effective?

    Read the article

  • Silverlight Async Design Pattern Issue

    - by Mike Mengell
    I'm in the middle of a Silverlight application and I have a function which needs to call a webservice and using the result complete the rest of the function. My issue is that I would have normally done a synchronous web service call got the result and using that carried on with the function. As Silverlight doesn't support synchronous web service calls without additional custom classes to mimic it, I figure it would be best to go with the flow of async rather than fight it. So my question relates around whats the best design pattern for working with async calls in program flow. In the following example I want to use the myFunction TypeId parameter depending on the return value of the web service call. But I don't want to call the web service until this function is called. How can I alter my code design to allow for the async call? string _myPath; bool myFunction(Guid TypeId) { WS_WebService1.WS_WebService1SoapClient proxy = new WS_WebService1.WS_WebService1SoapClient(); proxy.GetPathByTypeIdCompleted += new System.EventHandler<WS_WebService1.GetPathByTypeIdCompleted>(proxy_GetPathByTypeIdCompleted); proxy.GetPathByTypeIdAsync(TypeId); // Get return value if (myPath == "\\Server1") { //Use the TypeId parameter in here } } void proxy_GetPathByTypeIdCompleted(object sender, WS_WebService1.GetPathByTypeIdCompletedEventArgs e) { string server = e.Result.Server; myPath = '\\' + server; } Thanks in advance, Mike

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >