[xwiki-devs] [UX] Edit Buttons Order
Hi, Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri. Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View". What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned? (A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse) (B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel (C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel (D) other variation Remarks: - "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important. - "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*? - Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc - What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode. - Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions? Thanks, Caty
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
I was going to vote for (C) without further thought, but there's one important issue you raised: in the WYSIWYG editor the preview is not that useful. Here are some more arguments in favor of putting Preview first: When a non WYSIWYG editor is used, it's critical to use the Preview button, and putting it first helps. For consistency, the number and order of the buttons should be the same in all editors. The problem with the Cancel button being first was that it was the default form button, so pressing enter in a non-textarea field was the same as clicking cancel, thus the "oh my 50 minutes work is all gone" frustration. Preview is the least destructive action: it does not cause data loss, it does not cause an accidental save of work in progress data. Thus, it should be the first button. Even in the WYSIWYG editor, sometimes Preview helps. The width and height of the content is not the same, the panels are different, the background might be different (IIRC the WYSIWYG always uses a white background, while the theme might be different), the macros look different...
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
+1
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities.
+0.5
- "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
+1
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
So, final vote for me, (C) -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me. So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) : Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists. Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too). Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...) Mix of the precedents Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows) Is this ok ? Prpositions : 1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else 2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW 3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL (ordered by usage chronology) 4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small> When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface. The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose) Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases. I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think? Thibaut 2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi Thibaut, "Preview" exists because when writing in Wiki mode you want to see how the result looks, without saving. "Preview" has some additional advantages and usages if that certain page is: - "Watched" (send e-mails on changes and RSS feed) or - like XWiki.org has the changes connected to the IRC or - you make small modification that don't want to appear in History until you're ready to save. I use "Save&Continue" especially in development (plus the shortcut *<Alt> + <Shift> + s*). This way I get to save my changes without losing the line I am editing. "Save&View" is a final action that takes you out of the editor. This is good for beginners that don't know where the breadcrumb is or how to get out of the editor. "Cancel" is a necessity and an idiom than need to exist in actions. Gives the user the control that he can test and press anything in the interface without messing things out. If he is there by accident, "Cancel" will make things right. I know that you are the adept of normal users that use XWiki, but XWiki is also a developing platform and needs to satisfy developer needs too. Although there are 4 actions, they are straight forward and self-descriptive. Any user knows that "Save", "View", "Cancel", "Continue", "Preview" is. On the other hand "Publish", "Draft", "Update" are more application specific (blogs, emails) and it's harder to explain the user the difference between this words and the "Save". Proposition 3,4: so "Save" is saving the "article" and "Publish" puts it on server (?!?!?) . Also "article" is a constraint word that doesn't exactly explain concept of a XWiki page (it's not only about words on a page, but also other functionality embedded). So, IMO XWiki is a lot harder to use for users that want very simple applications, although we try to make it as simple as we can. The main advantage of XWiki is the power of its features. Power attracts complexity. Also a user may not ever know what every functionality does in an application. If he can find an action that does the trick for him, he will stick to that. If you didn't know what was every buttons functionality, that didn't stopped you of using it. Thanks for your feedback, Caty On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 14:19, Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com>wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL (ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi, On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com
wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki. It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published). As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"... "Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ... We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
(ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
In the long run we'll need some kind of draft support system and a way to automatically save page content to prevent data loss. Waiting for that day, I'm +1 for (C) too. Guillaume
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype: wikibc Twitter: glerouge http://guillaumelerouge.com/
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Guillaume Lerouge<guillaume@xwiki.com> wrote:
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki.
About renaming, WDYT of: "Save and quit editor" "Save" "Quit editor without saving" or the shorter: "Save and quit" "Save" "Quit"
It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published).
As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"...
Saving as a minor edit on "save and continue" sounds good. "Save draft" will be nice when we'll have a real draft feature (ie. saved but not published).
"Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ...
There's something bothering me with "publish" but I don't know what, may be the CMS connotation.
We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
-1 JV.
Time to be structured... Button naming is hard, especially if wanting to make a platform that is both ergonomic for normal users and for devs. (!!!) -- Thinking "ergonomy" does not mean the same for someone who is trying to bypass the understanding barreer (adoption) and someone who already have the understanding and who want the tool to be powerfull and efficient (fast and secure editing). -- Thinking the same world (ie publish) may not have the same meaning. -- Etc. So you have to make marketing before making UX... I think Emilie, Vincent, etc... should start the personas they want on the wiki (it is already made in fact but it only describe very large profiles that cover all type of possible users, having more real examples and if possible some priorities would help). Then we have to draw user actions schemas according to each persona. Saying what zone of the tool they generally use. For each function define how much each persona will potentially use it. Then each time you make a design or proposal think about it. Try to avoid having normal users lost as much as possible and at the same time try to make the tool as powerfull as possible for devs (keyboard shortcut only approach can be a good one ie). I'm sorry, to be honest I don't really like personas and others strucured anaylsis. I consider they are good for communication or to making people who are not used to UX enter in a UX perspective. For an UX designer it only make things more rigid wich not help creativity. Yet... I think they are to be used for heavy projects because if an eavy project is not structured people who work on it get lost and all lose coherence. I was not sure XWiki needed such heavy apparel. Yet because of collaboration complexity and because personas are good for communication I pushed for it. Caty just made me understand you want an ergonomy for both normal user and devs. Which is one of the most complicated thing I know. So I think we have to structure it. Structuring must not avoid us thinking out the bounds. But it should be here to help us to communicate, to help evryone to understand UX, to help to remember the problematics evrywhere, to help to create a good coherence. Also I repeat that we need marketing and management involved in it. UX is not only about ergonomy but also about emotion, strategic decisions, brand, spirit of the project, etc... I propose a vote about this and that someone take the management of this part (an UX designer or a manager) if XWiki SAS staff agree on that it has to be done. Thanks. 2009/9/4 Guillaume Lerouge <guillaume@xwiki.com>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX < thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com
wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki.
It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published).
As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"...
"Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ...
We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
(ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
In the long run we'll need some kind of draft support system and a way to automatically save page content to prevent data loss. Waiting for that day, I'm +1 for (C) too.
Guillaume
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this
the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor)
means -
having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype: wikibc Twitter: glerouge http://guillaumelerouge.com/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
"Save and quit editor" "Save" "Quit editor without saving" or the shorter: "Save and quit" "Save" "Quit"
+1 I find it ot be an exellent idea ! It makes evident that when saving only you will not quit. The longuer may be more securized. I'm not sur it is mandatory anyway. 2009/9/4 Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com>
Time to be structured...
Button naming is hard, especially if wanting to make a platform that is both ergonomic for normal users and for devs. (!!!)
-- Thinking "ergonomy" does not mean the same for someone who is trying to bypass the understanding barreer (adoption) and someone who already have the understanding and who want the tool to be powerfull and efficient (fast and secure editing). -- Thinking the same world (ie publish) may not have the same meaning. -- Etc.
So you have to make marketing before making UX... I think Emilie, Vincent, etc... should start the personas they want on the wiki (it is already made in fact but it only describe very large profiles that cover all type of possible users, having more real examples and if possible some priorities would help).
Then we have to draw user actions schemas according to each persona. Saying what zone of the tool they generally use. For each function define how much each persona will potentially use it.
Then each time you make a design or proposal think about it. Try to avoid having normal users lost as much as possible and at the same time try to make the tool as powerfull as possible for devs (keyboard shortcut only approach can be a good one ie).
I'm sorry, to be honest I don't really like personas and others strucured anaylsis. I consider they are good for communication or to making people who are not used to UX enter in a UX perspective. For an UX designer it only make things more rigid wich not help creativity. Yet... I think they are to be used for heavy projects because if an eavy project is not structured people who work on it get lost and all lose coherence.
I was not sure XWiki needed such heavy apparel. Yet because of collaboration complexity and because personas are good for communication I pushed for it.
Caty just made me understand you want an ergonomy for both normal user and devs. Which is one of the most complicated thing I know. So I think we have to structure it.
Structuring must not avoid us thinking out the bounds. But it should be here to help us to communicate, to help evryone to understand UX, to help to remember the problematics evrywhere, to help to create a good coherence.
Also I repeat that we need marketing and management involved in it. UX is not only about ergonomy but also about emotion, strategic decisions, brand, spirit of the project, etc...
I propose a vote about this and that someone take the management of this part (an UX designer or a manager) if XWiki SAS staff agree on that it has to be done.
Thanks.
2009/9/4 Guillaume Lerouge <guillaume@xwiki.com>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com
wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki.
It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published).
As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"...
"Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ...
We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
(ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
In the long run we'll need some kind of draft support system and a way to automatically save page content to prevent data loss. Waiting for that day, I'm +1 for (C) too.
Guillaume
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype: wikibc Twitter: glerouge http://guillaumelerouge.com/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Thanks, after re-reading Sergiu's points I think my preference would go to: [Preview] [Save & Quit Editor] [Save] [Quit] I think that if we refactor the edit mode so that the "Source" WYSIWYG tab becomes our wiki editor [1] the WYSIWYG will de facto become the easiest way to do a preview, making the preview action quite obsolete. But it's not for 2.0 :) [1] To be able to achieve that we implemented Lazy-loading of the rich text editor: if the WYSIWYG is configured with the source tab as default the rich text editor is not loaded before clicking on its tab. JV. On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX<thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com> wrote:
"Save and quit editor" "Save" "Quit editor without saving" or the shorter: "Save and quit" "Save" "Quit"
+1 I find it ot be an exellent idea !
It makes evident that when saving only you will not quit.
The longuer may be more securized. I'm not sur it is mandatory anyway.
2009/9/4 Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com>
Time to be structured...
Button naming is hard, especially if wanting to make a platform that is both ergonomic for normal users and for devs. (!!!)
-- Thinking "ergonomy" does not mean the same for someone who is trying to bypass the understanding barreer (adoption) and someone who already have the understanding and who want the tool to be powerfull and efficient (fast and secure editing). -- Thinking the same world (ie publish) may not have the same meaning. -- Etc.
So you have to make marketing before making UX... I think Emilie, Vincent, etc... should start the personas they want on the wiki (it is already made in fact but it only describe very large profiles that cover all type of possible users, having more real examples and if possible some priorities would help).
Then we have to draw user actions schemas according to each persona. Saying what zone of the tool they generally use. For each function define how much each persona will potentially use it.
Then each time you make a design or proposal think about it. Try to avoid having normal users lost as much as possible and at the same time try to make the tool as powerfull as possible for devs (keyboard shortcut only approach can be a good one ie).
I'm sorry, to be honest I don't really like personas and others strucured anaylsis. I consider they are good for communication or to making people who are not used to UX enter in a UX perspective. For an UX designer it only make things more rigid wich not help creativity. Yet... I think they are to be used for heavy projects because if an eavy project is not structured people who work on it get lost and all lose coherence.
I was not sure XWiki needed such heavy apparel. Yet because of collaboration complexity and because personas are good for communication I pushed for it.
Caty just made me understand you want an ergonomy for both normal user and devs. Which is one of the most complicated thing I know. So I think we have to structure it.
Structuring must not avoid us thinking out the bounds. But it should be here to help us to communicate, to help evryone to understand UX, to help to remember the problematics evrywhere, to help to create a good coherence.
Also I repeat that we need marketing and management involved in it. UX is not only about ergonomy but also about emotion, strategic decisions, brand, spirit of the project, etc...
I propose a vote about this and that someone take the management of this part (an UX designer or a manager) if XWiki SAS staff agree on that it has to be done.
Thanks.
2009/9/4 Guillaume Lerouge <guillaume@xwiki.com>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com
wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki.
It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published).
As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"...
"Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ...
We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
(ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
In the long run we'll need some kind of draft support system and a way to automatically save page content to prevent data loss. Waiting for that day, I'm +1 for (C) too.
Guillaume
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype: wikibc Twitter: glerouge http://guillaumelerouge.com/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-1 on Quit. Quit is when you QUIT an application, just like Exit. When you press that button you don't quit your wiki, you just leave the editor.
I felt it a bit too, was my problem about securizing. So if you felt it too I add my +1 --- [Quit editor] ??? I would say code more than source. Source sounds like a dev jargon terme to me. 2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>:
+1 on Wiki code should be named "Source".
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 16:40, Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com> wrote:
-1 on Quit. Quit is when you QUIT an application, just like Exit. When you press that button you don't quit your wiki, you just leave the editor.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
[Preview] [Save & Quit Editor] [Save] [Quit] +1, love... About preview by WYSIWYG for my psychology it all depends on how the editor lets me psycologically able to think is text in context. I'd may take Knol as an example of it (try to edit) : http://knol.google.com/k/kel-smith/universal-design-for-the-web/1dup26f8wrwc... For my part XWiki one is too limit to currently fit but i'm very exigent. I'm not award of the theorics about WYSIWIG psychology, i find it to be an intersting topic... Another topic. Does all inclusions renders in WYSIWYG ? 2009/9/4 Jean-Vincent Drean <jean-vincent@drean.org>:
Thanks, after re-reading Sergiu's points I think my preference would go to:
[Preview] [Save & Quit Editor] [Save] [Quit]
I think that if we refactor the edit mode so that the "Source" WYSIWYG tab becomes our wiki editor [1] the WYSIWYG will de facto become the easiest way to do a preview, making the preview action quite obsolete. But it's not for 2.0 :)
[1] To be able to achieve that we implemented Lazy-loading of the rich text editor: if the WYSIWYG is configured with the source tab as default the rich text editor is not loaded before clicking on its tab.
JV.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX<thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com> wrote:
"Save and quit editor" "Save" "Quit editor without saving" or the shorter: "Save and quit" "Save" "Quit"
+1 I find it ot be an exellent idea !
It makes evident that when saving only you will not quit.
The longuer may be more securized. I'm not sur it is mandatory anyway.
2009/9/4 Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com>
Time to be structured...
Button naming is hard, especially if wanting to make a platform that is both ergonomic for normal users and for devs. (!!!)
-- Thinking "ergonomy" does not mean the same for someone who is trying to bypass the understanding barreer (adoption) and someone who already have the understanding and who want the tool to be powerfull and efficient (fast and secure editing). -- Thinking the same world (ie publish) may not have the same meaning. -- Etc.
So you have to make marketing before making UX... I think Emilie, Vincent, etc... should start the personas they want on the wiki (it is already made in fact but it only describe very large profiles that cover all type of possible users, having more real examples and if possible some priorities would help).
Then we have to draw user actions schemas according to each persona. Saying what zone of the tool they generally use. For each function define how much each persona will potentially use it.
Then each time you make a design or proposal think about it. Try to avoid having normal users lost as much as possible and at the same time try to make the tool as powerfull as possible for devs (keyboard shortcut only approach can be a good one ie).
I'm sorry, to be honest I don't really like personas and others strucured anaylsis. I consider they are good for communication or to making people who are not used to UX enter in a UX perspective. For an UX designer it only make things more rigid wich not help creativity. Yet... I think they are to be used for heavy projects because if an eavy project is not structured people who work on it get lost and all lose coherence.
I was not sure XWiki needed such heavy apparel. Yet because of collaboration complexity and because personas are good for communication I pushed for it.
Caty just made me understand you want an ergonomy for both normal user and devs. Which is one of the most complicated thing I know. So I think we have to structure it.
Structuring must not avoid us thinking out the bounds. But it should be here to help us to communicate, to help evryone to understand UX, to help to remember the problematics evrywhere, to help to create a good coherence.
Also I repeat that we need marketing and management involved in it. UX is not only about ergonomy but also about emotion, strategic decisions, brand, spirit of the project, etc...
I propose a vote about this and that someone take the management of this part (an UX designer or a manager) if XWiki SAS staff agree on that it has to be done.
Thanks.
2009/9/4 Guillaume Lerouge <guillaume@xwiki.com>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Thibaut DEVERAUX <thibaut.deveraux@gmail.com
wrote:
Personally I never understand thoose different buttons. Just amazing me.
So there the user chains are (tell me if I'm right) :
Use SAVE & VIEW only The user is writting a message. He saves it. Dangers : - He may save and then see errors and come back to modify : why PREVIEW exists - He may find it to long to save while writting, don't save, loose his work. Especially on long messages. Why SAVE & VIEW exists.
Use PREVIEW then SAVE (and sometime modfy again ^_^ ) - Formated textes - User than can't correct a text in edit mode (I do and some friends too).
Use SAVE & CONTINU, SAVE & CONTINU [...], SAVE AND VIEW - Long textes - User with un unstable internet correction - User that get a bit stressed of loosing them work (unstable internet, clumsy, just stressed...)
Mix of the precedents
Use CANCEL - Undo save & continus - quitting edit mode without using a "hack" (back button, close the wondows)
Is this ok ?
Prpositions :
1 - Simplicity SAVE - nothing else
2 - Simplicity, keeping history a bit clean SAVE - PREVIEW
3 - Full featured PREVIEW - SAVE - PUBLISH --------------- CANCEL
We actually had a remark from a customer not so long ago who asked us to rename "Save & View" into "Publish" on their wiki.
It might be a good thing to rename it for the main wiki too as it sounds a bit clearer and explains well what the result of the action will be (the document will get published).
As for the "save & continue" button I know I often end up using it as I would use an autosave. I'm not sure about others but it seems to me that the default use is to ensure that no content get lost. Maybe we could make the "save & continue" button create minor edit and rename it to "save draft" or simply "save"...
"Save" would meand keep my work secure while "Publish" would mean "I'm done with my work, put it online" . The drawback being that the content gets published even when clcking "save & continue" / "save" / "save draft" ...
We could also make the preview also be a minor edit save action so that each time the user previews the page his progress is saved but that kills the "preview" part...
(ordered by usage chronology)
4 - Draft system <small>SAVE DRAFT --- PREVIEW DRAFT</small> PUSBLISH DRAFT /or/ UPDATE ARTICLE <small> Cancel modifications </small>
When I'm not making a huge contribution I prefer 2. When I'm writting long messages I apprecy the "SAVE & VIEW logic. When I'm reading mysefl I apprecy the "PREVIEW" logic. I'm an user I want evrything. Then I complain I'm getting lost in the interface.
The magic "advanced" menu is not really adapted here. So I guess we can have what i call a "sicentific" ergonome approche : put evrything and try to make it clear anyway. Or what i would call a radical design approche : just kill functionallities only a few users use. (we need stats **from average users** or a good nose)
Also maybe someone could find a way to get a simpler usage chain for the sames user cases.
I'm for simplest things so I would say 2 (mine), yet I don't have the experience of users, netheir the marketing infos. So if your really think it is necessary (really ? snif...) I would say 4 (mine), wich is C (Caty). I find the save & ... to be amazing. So I prefer the others. What tou you think?
In the long run we'll need some kind of draft support system and a way to automatically save page content to prevent data loss. Waiting for that day, I'm +1 for (C) too.
Guillaume
Thibaut
2009/9/4 Ecaterina Valica <valicac@gmail.com>
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Guillaume Lerouge Product Manager - XWiki Skype: wikibc Twitter: glerouge http://guillaumelerouge.com/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
+1 Thanks, Marius
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
+1 for (C) -1 on Quit. Like Caty says Quit is used for quiting applications. I think "Save and View" & "Save and Continue" are good name choices that serve their purpose. I think we should keep them provided we don't receive additional user/customer remarks. Ecaterina Valica-2 wrote:
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
----- Silvia Rusu Tester & Documentation Writer - XWiki http://twitter.com/silviarusu -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/UX-Edit-Buttons-Order-tp3579224p3580564.html Sent from the XWiki- Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
I just noticed the change made on all skins, and I don't find it comfortable to have this change in toucan because: I think, as in the case of titles policy, that we're building a new, better skin and changes like this should be in the new skin. I find it disturbing to have different order for buttons than I was used to, and, although I agree to get used to it in a new skin, I don't find it appropriate that I have to get used to it on the old skin too. I think users should be able to preserve their beloved skin which they're used to if they want, including buttons order. Caty motivated this change across all skins with the fact that form design (alignments, buttons order, et all) it's a platform standard and platform changes are applied to all skins. I think these standards are UI/UX/ergonomy standards and they should only be preserved across a skin. On the very same platform one could build a right aligned skin, it doesn't impact the platform in any way, I don't see why we would impose this as a "platform thing". This is the type of annoying change for a user (I keep going to the wrong side of the screen with my mouse) and, while I'm ok with getting used to it on a new skin, I find it slightly frustrating on the skin I was used to. Happy coding, Anca
Right now the Edit Actions are "Cancel", "Preview", "Save&Continue", "Save&View".
What do you think is the right order for them when they are left-aligned?
(A) Save&View, Save&Continue, Preview, Cancel (as it is - just in reverse)
(B) Save&View, Preview, Save&Continue, Cancel
(C) Preview, Save&Continue, Save&View, Cancel
(D) other variation
Remarks:
- "Cancel" should be *last* because it's a terminal (takes you out of the editor), no-saving action. This is the least important.
- "Save & View" is also a terminal action (takes you out of the editor) - having it* first* you have the 2 terminal actions at extremities. - "Preview" is the least damaging action in case of accidental submit (Silvia + Marta) - should be *first*?
- Some people use ("Preview" + "Save&Continue") {many times} + "Save&View" {final} - Other people just use "Save&Continue" + "Save & View" {final}, never "Preview", etc
- What is the necessity for the "Preview" button in a WYSIYWG editor? On the other hand "Preview" is very important if you edit in "Wiki" mode.
- Should "Preview" separate the two other SAVING actions? (Marta) - Should "Save&Continue" separate the two other VIEW actions?
Thanks, Caty _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:04, Anca Luca <ancapaula.luca@xwiki.com> wrote:
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri.
I just noticed the change made on all skins, and I don't find it comfortable to have this change in toucan because:
I think, as in the case of titles policy, that we're building a new, better skin and changes like this should be in the new skin. I find it disturbing to have different order for buttons than I was used to, and, although I agree to get used to it in a new skin, I don't find it appropriate that I have to get used to it on the old skin too. I think users should be able to preserve their beloved skin which they're used to if they want, including buttons order.
We agreed that this order caused confusion between some users and was better to be changed. You're saying something like: don't change it (even if it's broken), just because I'm used to it. The change was made for the benefit of all users.
Caty motivated this change across all skins with the fact that form design (alignments, buttons order, et all) it's a platform standard and platform changes are applied to all skins.
I think these standards are UI/UX/ergonomy standards and they should only be preserved across a skin. On the very same platform one could build a right aligned skin, it doesn't impact the platform in any way, I don't see why we would impose this as a "platform thing".
This is the type of annoying change for a user (I keep going to the wrong side of the screen with my mouse) and, while I'm ok with getting used to it on a new skin, I find it slightly frustrating on the skin I was used to.
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:04, Anca Luca <ancapaula.luca@xwiki.com> wrote:
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri. I just noticed the change made on all skins, and I don't find it comfortable to have this change in toucan because:
I think, as in the case of titles policy, that we're building a new, better skin and changes like this should be in the new skin. I find it disturbing to have different order for buttons than I was used to, and, although I agree to get used to it in a new skin, I don't find it appropriate that I have to get used to it on the old skin too. I think users should be able to preserve their beloved skin which they're used to if they want, including buttons order.
We agreed that this order caused confusion between some users and was better to be changed. You're saying something like: don't change it (even if it's broken), just because I'm used to it.
Yes. but only in the current context, when we _are_ actually fixing _all_ these issues, by building a new skin, otherwise I don't see why we build a new skin and not fix the one we have. Now I'm not trying to justify the new skin by not merging the fixes in the old one, it's just that this is the kind of annoying change and, since we are dramatically improving everything in a new skin, I don't see why annoy users and apply these disruptive changes in the old skin too. just my 0.2 cents... Thanks, Anca
The change was made for the benefit of all users.
Caty motivated this change across all skins with the fact that form design (alignments, buttons order, et all) it's a platform standard and platform changes are applied to all skins.
I think these standards are UI/UX/ergonomy standards and they should only be preserved across a skin. On the very same platform one could build a right aligned skin, it doesn't impact the platform in any way, I don't see why we would impose this as a "platform thing".
This is the type of annoying change for a user (I keep going to the wrong side of the screen with my mouse) and, while I'm ok with getting used to it on a new skin, I find it slightly frustrating on the skin I was used to.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
So basicly you have a set of user that are used to the old way. Theses users will see that one day, the order of the buttons change and they get lost during a few days, cliking on the old places of buttons. UX Design field, and especially ergonomy are full of "historical reasons", things that have not been changed because of it. I remember of such sort of thing about keyboards ie. Another example is some dyctalos that always use anachronic versions of MS Word on old computers because they are used of it. An historical reasons is a good thing for user that are used of something. Evrything depends if there is an impact on new users and further generations. So if there is a further generation of users on toucan consider that they will be penalised by the historical reasons. World is already so full of anachronysmes... ;-) 2009/9/14 Anca Luca <ancapaula.luca@xwiki.com>:
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:04, Anca Luca <ancapaula.luca@xwiki.com> wrote:
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
Because we want to make a standard from vertical-aligned form, this means the buttons should be left-ordered with the most important action first. This should be changed also in Toucan and Albatross skin, not only just in Colibri. I just noticed the change made on all skins, and I don't find it comfortable to have this change in toucan because:
I think, as in the case of titles policy, that we're building a new, better skin and changes like this should be in the new skin. I find it disturbing to have different order for buttons than I was used to, and, although I agree to get used to it in a new skin, I don't find it appropriate that I have to get used to it on the old skin too. I think users should be able to preserve their beloved skin which they're used to if they want, including buttons order.
We agreed that this order caused confusion between some users and was better to be changed. You're saying something like: don't change it (even if it's broken), just because I'm used to it.
Yes.
but only in the current context, when we _are_ actually fixing _all_ these issues, by building a new skin, otherwise I don't see why we build a new skin and not fix the one we have.
Now I'm not trying to justify the new skin by not merging the fixes in the old one, it's just that this is the kind of annoying change and, since we are dramatically improving everything in a new skin, I don't see why annoy users and apply these disruptive changes in the old skin too.
just my 0.2 cents...
Thanks, Anca
The change was made for the benefit of all users.
Caty motivated this change across all skins with the fact that form design (alignments, buttons order, et all) it's a platform standard and platform changes are applied to all skins.
I think these standards are UI/UX/ergonomy standards and they should only be preserved across a skin. On the very same platform one could build a right aligned skin, it doesn't impact the platform in any way, I don't see why we would impose this as a "platform thing".
This is the type of annoying change for a user (I keep going to the wrong side of the screen with my mouse) and, while I'm ok with getting used to it on a new skin, I find it slightly frustrating on the skin I was used to.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
participants (8)
-
Anca Luca -
Ecaterina Valica -
Guillaume Lerouge -
Jean-Vincent Drean -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Silvia Rusu -
Thibaut DEVERAUX