With recent work going on to support content from multiple pages and handles, the content are now no longer in order.
A sort by timestamp feature, (probably a merge sort at the mergePosts in Fb.js) is required.
mergePosts
I designed something for fedora social to sort posts from different apps
<img alt="app-04.jpg" src="/Fedora-app/issue/raw/files/ad99b4f9f5fb3c735e3ab654de5dff6a07546ed108308a12583525c124326712-app-04.jpg" />
Primarily did two tasks:
Re-designed the UI card for social, which contains: Content, Cover Image, Timestamp, Likes/Retweets, CTAs (View or Share).
Added feature of filters:
<img alt="social-filters-cards.jpg" src="/Fedora-app/issue/raw/files/a40af428adeff43fe3320ba753f7228cf4157e9a763f746fea64adaa0e3348de-social-filters-cards.jpg" />
@amitosh, if we push all the post in the same array and add a filter of timestamp instead of writing a separate function. Thoughts ?
@wildflower @shilpi1958 thanks for your designs.
@wildflower, the filter looks good. @shilpi1958, what does Home, About, Events, Photos, Post shows ?
@a2batic in the current app on clicking a post the same post is viewed on facebook . I wanted to reduce the steps . So on clicking facebook icon directly facebook page will be opened and the users can scroll and see other posts. Since the posts in facebook already in chronological order we are doing three things in one step i.e filtering, sorting and selecting a post . Different social media problems can be scrolled horizontally.
This is the mobile view of facebook.
I feel it might increase cognitive load on the user. There's a primary tab layer (of all the social medias), and then there's classification of that category into further more fields. The whole aim is to serve trending social media updates in one place.
@wildflower this ia the facebook mobile view as was done in previous veeaion of the app .
We are not trying to implement the same designs.
Due to filters and hamburger visibility is seriously compromised . Moreover three clicks for a filter isnt good UX.
How and visibility of what is compromised due to hamburger and filter? I am not sure what you mean here? There're no three clicks for a filter. It's just one click. You can see the same flow with major e-commerce and websites which use filters.
I will have to click a post to see the same post in my browser. I wanted to reduce the step. So cognitive load is not a problem here.
Copying the entire template of facebook/twitter etc in our app would: - firstly, bring a huge amount of inconsistency in Fedora's app. We are deviating from standard guidelines we would be working with. - Secondly, it'd take another multiple if not just one, to navigate between various social channels which in my opinion, is a very uncomfortable UX.
we are not trying to implement same designs. steps for filter first: click the filter second : select the social media third: apply filter button
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/hamburger-menus/ read this article for understanding visibility . Hope it helps!
Copying the entire template of facebook/twitter etc in our app would: - firstly, bring a huge amount of inconsistency in Fedora's app. We are deviating from standard guidelines we would be working with.
it cant be against the guidelines since it was already the design . you are going to view the app in your browser anyway. its just one step less.
Secondly, it'd take another multiple if not just one, to navigate between various social channels which in my opinion, is a very uncomfortable UX.
I don't understand you here.
It was a great read! :)
However, that's just for scaling from mobile to desktop issues. Hamburgers usually fail miserably on desktops. I am sure they might face problems in mobile design, but depends how you're handling it.
In our case, hamburger is the sole navigation here. And therefore, it should not lose points on visibility metrics. Also it allows flexibility to add more contents in case of future expansion. We should consider that as well.
@a2batic
if we push all the post in the same array and add a filter of timestamp instead of writing a separate function. Thoughts ?
Any simple sorting will do the trick. Yes even in the same function, it doesn't make much difference.
Metadata Update from @amitosh: - Issue tagged with: easy-fix
Login to comment on this ticket.