Logical operators in rules are not user friendly

[flatsiedatsie]

While things like <= and > make sense to us geeks, my mom doesn't know what they mean.

As the user-friendliness is one of this projects strong points, perhaps this can also be remade into a 'normal people' version. Maybe a "bigger than", "smaller than", "equal to" and "not equal to" dropdown can already cover 99.9% of use cases?

[dhylands]

I've seen "all of list-of-items" in place of "and" and "any of list-of-items" in place of "or" used in other programs (i.e. gmail).

[flatsiedatsie]

I really like how a human readable sentence is generated.

Just a crazy thought: what if manipulating this sentence would be the main interface for rule creation?

Advantages:

• Easier to understand for my mom. Little blocks connected by lines, that's pretty geeky. But we all understand text based rules immediately, since we grew up un homes with rules like that.
• Easier to create and maintain? Use standard dropdowns?
• Easier to expand with other functionality down the road, like "but only if...", "while ... " and other pieces of grammar.
• It would push more towards on the fly voice-based rule creation. "Mozilla, today when it's 5:30 turn off the oven".

[flatsiedatsie]

As far as I can tell the current rule interface has simplified things to just "bigger than" and "smaller than"?

I really like it!