Re: [Usability] Instant Apply Windows

[Christian Rose <menthos menthos com>]

tor 2002-01-03 klockan 15.29 skrev Gregory Merchan:
> > > This is not a compromise. This is what those of us who have looked into
> > > common practice and have observed users in action are against.
> > 
> > No, we're not against it. "Look into common practice and observe users"
> > and you'll see that there are a significant number of users that are
> > really confused by dialogs/preference windows with no obvious way to
> > close them.
> 
> Aren't you so cute and witty? ha. ha.
> 
> The conjunction indicates that both conditions are to be satisfied.

Yes. There are two sides of the coin, and there appearantly must be some
sort of tradeoff or compromise in "buttoning", since both removing
buttons and keeping buttons is mutually exclusive.


> Even if having two apparent ways to close the window did not make it less
> obvious how to close the windows, you cannot satisfy the condion of
> identifying common practice. Any cuteness is irrelevant.

What do you mean by "you cannot satisfy the condion of identifying
common practice"? Are you disqualifying my user observations, while on
the same time offering no proof that your observations should represent
"the common practice"?


> And even if you disagree with that, the point still stands that what is
> shown is not a compromise.

It might not be a compromise that you like, but still uses a different
wording and a clearly different set of buttons from a traditional dialog
to satisfy your worry about it not being clear enough that the window is
instant-apply.


> > > A button labelled "Done" is still a Close button because that is the
> > > command it issues.
> > > 
> > >   (Unless, of course, a Done button is supposed to mean,
> > >    "Now accept my changes."; in which case this is not an
> > >    instant-apply window, but instead a rather bizarre
> > >    dialog in that it has not Ok and Cancel buttons.)
> > 
> > A Done button is supposed to mean "I'm done with my changes".
> > There really is no extra danger of confusing it with a traditional
> > OK/Cancel/Apply non-instant-apply preference window unless you don't
> > read button labels at all, or notice that the number of buttons and
> > groupings of buttons is entirely different. . . .
> 
> Do you have any usability studies to prove that?

Do you have any usability studies to show that no buttons at all instead
of just a "Done" button would make it more clear that this is
instant-apply?
Do you have any usability studies that show that removing all buttons
does not make navigability and accessibility worse for users?


> >                                        . . .The only thing you
> > accomplish by removing all buttons is removing the obvious way to exit
> > the window for many users, and make the window harder to navigate for
> > other users, not bringing some extra mysterious "clarity".
> 
> Do you have any usability studies to prove that?

Do you have any usability studies to disprove that? It's you that want
to remove all buttons, not me.


Christian