As Shahyar said, we're still iterating but there will be a need for a "non-primary" button in many places throughout the UI
*Jared Zimmerman * \\ Director of User Experience \\ Wikimedia Foundation M : +1 415 609 4043 | : @JaredZimmerman<https://twitter.com/JaredZimmerman> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Shahyar Ghobadpour < [email protected]> wrote: > A "quieter than normal" button is necessary, I just don't like the current > implementation. So, we can't get rid of it just yet. > > I have a patch going up for review today with an additional type called > sleeper buttons, which are somewhere between normal and quiet. > > --Shahyar > On Apr 3, 2014 10:49 AM, "Bartosz Dziewoński" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Since no one answered, let me ask a different question – would anyone >> oppose if I were to remove the .mw-ui-quiet class? >> >> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> >> Actually, what is the rationale for having a separate "quiet" style? >>> >>> The one that seems to be given here seems to be the "inverse Fitts' law" >>> [1], but I don't really see how just making a button more bland helps >>> with >>> this. >>> >>> I'd be all for killing it and sticking to a simpler visual convention, >>> just using regular (non-colored) buttons where we'd previously try to use >>> the quiet ones. >>> >>> [1] http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-opposite-of-fitts-law/ >>> >> >> (Resending because something ate the previous one.) >> >> -- >> Matma Rex >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Design mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design >> > > _______________________________________________ > Design mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design > >
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
