Guillaume Lerouge wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Anca Paula Luca > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Anca Paula Luca wrote: >>> Guillaume Lerouge wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> A bit of summarizing on what we've got so far: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Ecaterina Valica <[email protected] >>> wrote: >>>>> * 1.* >>>>> >>>>> >> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/NewWysiwygEditorInterfaceAppendix#HModalboxtitles >>>>> +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/NewWysiwygEditorInterfaceAppendix#HMarkerformandatoryformfieldsinmodalboxes >>>>> +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 >> because >>> 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_eyetracking_study.htm >>> guideline 5 where normal colors are used). >>> >>>> WDYT? > > 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.
-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/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
