24 Aug
2009
24 Aug
'09
7:46 p.m.
Ecaterina Valica wrote:
We should make a standard and follow it on other
aspects too.
The same discussion is for the pagination: do you show the prev link? yes
you do, and it's disabled. But the user know that a Prev action can be done
and he knows it's possition.
The same aspect is for menus too - if I don't have Edit rights - should I
see the edit link?
It's not quite the same: "if you were logged in / had the edit rights, you could
edit". Here we propose to hide the things that _are not possible at all_ at that
moment, no matter what you do.
These remarks are very correct:
While I understand and agree with A & B and the fact that we need a rule, I
disagree with C: from the designing pov we can make them stay in their places
(that was the idea actually, they _don't move around_ when siblings are hidden).
And the appearing and disappearing would be corresponding with whether can be
used or not (I'd say that could help).
Thanks,
Anca
Actually, Marius suggested that we keep the
"invalid" buttons hidden (but
without changing the positions of the displayed buttons), for the following
reasons:
1/ the interface should be as light as possible, we shouldn't crowd the
interface with buttons that the user can never push
2/ disabled buttons can be a little confusing, the user wouldn't know if
there
is something he needs to do to enable those buttons.
But if you have the icons/links/buttons disabled:
A. the users knows the possible actions are there and doesn't need to still
look for them in the interface;
B. when the finishing / editing step will occur and will be possible, the
user will know where to look for it, because he seen it before.
C. the buttons don't disappear and appear like crazy. This is good also for
the designer - he can align the controls and the other sibling elements
don't blink from left to right. _______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs