: > I was experimenting with error fields and after some debate decided to do it this way (granted this form is simple, sorry about the non-Englishness!): https://www.net-apotek.no/site/shop/register.html
From: "Maxim Soloviev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : Very nice form. : However I would go with labels above controls to avoid that horizontal gap between label and control. I agree that it's a very nice form. I found it quite easy to fill in even without speaking any Norwegian. But... I definitely wouldn't go with the labels above the fields. The opening few questions are what I'd call 'slot-in' answers i.e. ones that are easily available in the user's head and you're just looking for the spot to slot them into. (Forename, surname, address, etc). These could go above the boxes without causing any difficulty. But then we hit some slot-in answers that have privacy problems associated with them i.e. Telephone number and email address. The form correctly provides a short explanation of how these will be used - and that wouldn't work nearly as well above the boxes. Then we come to a complex answer that I'd call 'gathered', i.e. one that few users would have in their heads but would instead have to look up from somewhere else: "Medlemsnummer". My abilities in Norwegian are minimal, but I'm guessing that this is a specialist number of some sort that you have to pick off some paperwork. The form gives quite a lengthy explanation, picture of the documents (I guess) and an example. I'd say that left-positioned, left-justified labels are a better choice for gathered answers in most cases. I was slightly less convinced by left-justifying the last three checkboxes. I would rather see all the 'places for me to type' lined up together, so that the checkboxes align with the other fields. I'd then want to experiment with placing the labels before or after. Unfortunately, my inability with Norwegian failed altogether at this point. Ordinarily, I'd expect to think about where the answers come from and whether to split the introductory text from the label. For a longer discussion of the placement of labels on forms, see my article: http://www.usabilitynews.com/news/article3507.asp In terms of validations: it was very easy to see where I made mistakes. But I would definitely recommend a double cue: at the moment, you're using bold red to show an error, which might not be all that obvious to someone with a visual deficiency. I'd suggest using an extra cue as well. I didn't try this form with a screenreader, so that would also be worth testing. It was less obvious why the form wouldn't accept a UK format telephone number (+44 1525 370379) - it just highlighted the label without any explanation of what the problem is. Could be that it's a 'wrong type of user' problem, if this form will be used exclusively by people with Norwegian telephone numbers. I tried using the Medlemsnummer in the example. This error message did give me a double cue: the text "Feil i medlemsnummer". Unfortunately, I don't know what this means but it looks too short to be a real explanation of how to get hold of an actual melemsnummer. My final error was on the last checkbox where I got a double cue of a fresh piece of red text saying "Vennligst aksepter vilkårene". I think this means that you must accept the terms and conditions, and although it's maybe a tiny bit brusque it did seem fair enough to me. Hope this helps Caroline Jarrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01525 370379 Effortmark Ltd Usability - Forms - Content ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
