Re: SOC: Quick thoughts on node design, anyone?

[Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>]

On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 07:22:43PM -0700, stripe dog wrote:
> Okay, here is round two with the node designs. Same deal - questions,
> comments, clarifications, death threats. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
>
> http://barney.gonzaga.edu/~cnevins/nmap/prettymapgraphics.htm

Looks great to me.  I like that you have 3 detail levels now.  It is
great that the hostname is included too.  Including the hostname
should be helpful, and the colors are easier to read.  You might want
to consider using the bigger circle for the vendor and the small one
for device type (rather than vice versa).

You might want to consider combining the 'vendor' and 'device type'
images into just one image (as you had in iteration two.  This may be
useful since many vendors only have one device type.  This is because
many (most?) vendors only support one device type.  The system could
look for a matching image for [vendor]-[devicetype].  If it is not
found, the system could just use the image for [vendor].  If that
doesn't exist, it can use the image for [devicetype].  The vendor and
device type will be written in the red top bar anyway.  It seems like
one big Linux penguin or Windows logo may be better than having the
big "general purpose" icon and also a little penguin or Windows logo.
Checking for [vendor]-[devicetype] first would allow us to have
special-purpose icons if we want to distinguish (say) a Cisco router
from a Cisco PIX firewall.

As usual, I think the aesthetic design looks great!

Cheers,
Fyodor


_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev