19 Aug
2009
19 Aug
'09
5:50 p.m.
Guillaume Lerouge wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Anca Paula Luca
<ancapaula.luca(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
-1.
The goal is to make it _visible_ that a field is required, not to make
sure that the first thing the user sees is that some fields are
required. By making the (required) text too visible, the user will be
confused. First 5 seconds after I open a dialog:
"Wow, something red, this is important. Did I do something wrong? Huh?
This is a required field. This one too. This one too. Which fields are
required? Target URL, link text, and tooltip. Now, what was I trying to
do? What am I linking too?"
This is wrong. We're getting the user's attention for something not that
critical. If the user fails to fill in a field, it's not the end of the
world. The wizard will notify this later, and the user will be able to
fill it in.
Ideal first two seconds:
"Hm, now I have to enter the link. This is the link URL. Link text? Oh,
this one is required, better fill it in. etc."
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
Anca Paula Luca wrote:
because
I like I and the fact that it pops out a bit more (which is the point of the
required sign, make it obvious that those 2 fields have to be filled). I'll
be ok with H if nobody else likes it though. Guillaume Lerouge wrote:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/NewWysiwygEditorInterfaceAppendi…
Hi,
A bit of summarizing on what we've got so far:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Ecaterina Valica <valicac(a)gmail.com
wrote:
>> * 1.*
>>
>> >> +1 for A with a left-aligned title (keep
the consistency with the left
>> alignerd forms)
> Pretty much everyone agreed on left-aligned title.
>
> *2. *
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/NewWysiwygEditorInterfaceAppendi…
>> +1 F, G, H with modifications:
>> F - * need somewhere to be stated that * means Required
>> - the location of the star changes the position with the length of
the
>> label
>>
>> G - from a visual scanning point of view, it's better that they are at
the
>> beginning of the line and the stars are
not changing their position
>> - but the star should be outside the alignment of the text
>> - also somewhere needs o be stated the meaning of the star
>>
>> H - is the most straight forward
>> - Required should have another color than the explanatory text ("Type
the
>
address...") so it pops out
I used the same color & style for
"required" as for the explanatory text it's the same type of information,
explanations for the field. The
position next
to the field label is supposed to distinguish it
from the rest of the
explanation.
>> I agree with Sergiu that green is not the
best color for required
fields.
>> Also it has low contrast with black and
white.
>>
> Proposal H got the most vote. I agree with Caty on the fact that make it
> colored would pop out more. As long as it's a dark enough color I think
it
> won't hinder accessibility.
>
> Thus I'm suggesting we use H but with "required" printed in the orange
color
> used in proposal G.
I added prototype
I to illustrate this. The orange used is the "wiki
standard
colors" orange (which could, of course be grayed a bit to match the other
labels).
dark enough color is not compatible with that
orange flavour :) . I can
do a
prototype but I think it will be a lot too much
(since it's more than
just a
sign, it's a full word orange).
how about H as is? (compatible with the link you gave me to
http://www.cxpartners.co.uk/thoughts/web_forms_design_guidelines_an_eyetrac…
> guideline 5 where normal colors are used).
>
>> WDYT?