Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Mathew Robertson]

I've been working with he data generated by surveys, for quite a number of
years and tip that I can give that applies in example is that a boolean
question (aka Yes/No) is represented by 4 states, when asked in a web form,
i.e.

- no response was saved, eg form was served correctly, form was hacked to
submit without a value, etc
- form submitted, but no choice selected
- yes
- no

The solution is to use 3 radio buttons with one of them titled as
'unselected' and with that radio hidden from visibility. As a bonus, it is
also more 'accessible' than the 2-button case.

Mathew Robertson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Steve Gibbings]

Agreed it does depend entirely on the situation and users.  By universally 
implemented I wasn't being flippant, I meant to be saying that things have 
moved on, just the modified model of radio set use doesn't work everywhere.  
For some reason undefined/unset radio button sets get overlooked by users 
trying to complete a form fast than some other methods.  Personally I try to 
reword/remodel to avoid uses of yes/no answers.  If unsure run some user 
audience testing.  If they hesitate longer at a yes/no then perhaps that is 
confusing for them.

>From a html/w3C standpoint I don't have an issue of course, my view was purely 
>user experience.


On 8 Jun 2010, at 02:38, Ben Buchanan wrote:

> 
> 
> On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings  wrote:
> I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an option 
> selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you 
> remember where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that 
> doesn't get universally implemented.
> 
> Technically correct, true. Would you recommend a checkbox instead, or some 
> other option?
> 
> In practice I think the usage of radio buttons has shifted to accommodate 
> sets with no initial selection. In usability terms it's probably better than 
> a dropdown for a yes/no; and some people do have some issues with the implied 
> off state of checkboxes. Compare it with a paper form where you have two 
> boxes and you tick or cross an option - there's no preselection. I guess it 
> depends which paradigm is more likely to fit the scenario.
> 
> cheers,
> Ben
> 
> 
> -- 
> --- 
> --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
> --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
> 
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Steve Gibbings]

lol, well yes but then that would be attempting to break the input device on  
real radios.  Funnily we must be twins because as a kid I used to try to do 
that too.  I broke so much stuff...



On 8 Jun 2010, at 05:39, Lucien Stals wrote:

> And I seem to recall that the old radios on which the metaphor is based could 
> be pushed half in. That would cause all buttons to pop out thus having *no* 
> selection. Not saying that as a justification for having no selection in a 
> radio group. Just pointing out that the metaphor wears a bit thin ;)
> 
> Lucien.
> 
> 
> On 08/06/2010, at 11:38 AM, Ben Buchanan wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings  wrote:
>> I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an option 
>> selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you 
>> remember where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that 
>> doesn't get universally implemented.
>> 
>> Technically correct, true. Would you recommend a checkbox instead, or some 
>> other option?
>> 
>> In practice I think the usage of radio buttons has shifted to accommodate 
>> sets with no initial selection. In usability terms it's probably better than 
>> a dropdown for a yes/no; and some people do have some issues with the 
>> implied off state of checkboxes. Compare it with a paper form where you have 
>> two boxes and you tick or cross an option - there's no preselection. I guess 
>> it depends which paradigm is more likely to fit the scenario.
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Ben
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> --- 
>> --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
>> --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
>> 
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
>> ***
> 
> 
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Steve Gibbings]

Agreed it does depend entirely on the situation and users.  By universally 
implemented I wasn't being flippant, I meant to be saying that things have 
moved on, just the modified model of radio set use doesn't work everywhere.  
For some reason undefined/unset radio button sets get overlooked by users 
trying to complete a form fast than some other methods.  Personally I try to 
reword/remodel to avoid uses of yes/no answers.  If unsure run some user 
audience testing.  If they hesitate longer at a yes/no then perhaps that is 
confusing for them.

>From a html/w3C standpoint I don't have an issue of course, my view was purely 
>user experience.

Regards,

Steve


On 8 Jun 2010, at 02:38, Ben Buchanan wrote:

> 
> 
> On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings  wrote:
> I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an option 
> selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you 
> remember where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that 
> doesn't get universally implemented.
> 
> Technically correct, true. Would you recommend a checkbox instead, or some 
> other option?
> 
> In practice I think the usage of radio buttons has shifted to accommodate 
> sets with no initial selection. In usability terms it's probably better than 
> a dropdown for a yes/no; and some people do have some issues with the implied 
> off state of checkboxes. Compare it with a paper form where you have two 
> boxes and you tick or cross an option - there's no preselection. I guess it 
> depends which paradigm is more likely to fit the scenario.
> 
> cheers,
> Ben
> 
> 
> -- 
> --- 
> --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
> --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
> 
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Hassan Schroeder]

Lucien Stals wrote:
And I seem to recall that the old radios on which the metaphor is based 
could be pushed half in. That would cause all buttons to pop out thus 
having *no* selection. 


Poor implementations don't define a design pattern.  :-)

--
Hassan Schroeder - has...@webtuitive.com
webtuitive design ===  (+1) 408-621-3445   === http://webtuitive.com
twitter: @hassan
  dream.  code.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Lucien Stals]

And I seem to recall that the old radios on which the metaphor is based could 
be pushed half in. That would cause all buttons to pop out thus having *no* 
selection. Not saying that as a justification for having no selection in a 
radio group. Just pointing out that the metaphor wears a bit thin ;)

Lucien.


On 08/06/2010, at 11:38 AM, Ben Buchanan wrote:

> 
> 
> On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings  wrote:
> I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an option 
> selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you 
> remember where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that 
> doesn't get universally implemented.
> 
> Technically correct, true. Would you recommend a checkbox instead, or some 
> other option?
> 
> In practice I think the usage of radio buttons has shifted to accommodate 
> sets with no initial selection. In usability terms it's probably better than 
> a dropdown for a yes/no; and some people do have some issues with the implied 
> off state of checkboxes. Compare it with a paper form where you have two 
> boxes and you tick or cross an option - there's no preselection. I guess it 
> depends which paradigm is more likely to fit the scenario.
> 
> cheers,
> Ben
> 
> 
> -- 
> --- 
> --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
> --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
> 
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Ben Buchanan]

On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings  wrote:

> I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an
> option selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you
> remember where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that
> doesn't get universally implemented.
>

Technically correct, true. Would you recommend a checkbox instead, or some
other option?

In practice I think the usage of radio buttons has shifted to accommodate
sets with no initial selection. In usability terms it's probably better than
a dropdown for a yes/no; and some people do have some issues with the
implied off state of checkboxes. Compare it with a paper form where you have
two boxes and you tick or cross an option - there's no preselection. I guess
it depends which paradigm is more likely to fit the scenario.

cheers,
Ben


-- 
--- 
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Steve Gibbings]

I have a problem with that.   Radio button sets should always have an option 
selected, there is no undefined selection.  This makes sense when you remember 
where the radio button metaphor came from. However seems that doesn't get 
universally implemented.



On 7 Jun 2010, at 02:25, Ben Buchanan wrote:

> 
> 
> On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:
> I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in it.
> I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does anyone 
> have any good UI/UX suggestions?
> 
> My three ideas were...
> 
> Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
> Do you...?
> Yes
> No
> 
> I go back to the fact radio buttons show mutually-exclusive options, which 
> makes a very clear yes/no. If your question needs the user to actively 
> specify a yes or no, it's a good solution. Checkboxes mean one response is 
> given by omission, which is a less definitive interaction.
> 
> Since radio buttons are one element short on their own, you need to wrap them 
> in a fieldset and legend to essentially act like a label for the set of radio 
> buttons. I also think the button should be on the left and the text on the 
> right (in left-to-right languages), since a) that just seems the most common 
> thing, and b) if you were to add a couple of divs to create rows, the buttons 
> would line up neatly above each other. 
> 
> Which gives us...
> 
> Do you...?
> Yes
> No
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps...
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Ben
> 
> 
> -- 
> --- 
> --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
> --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
> 
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Ben Buchanan]

On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:

> I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in it.
> I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does anyone
> have any good UI/UX suggestions?
>
> My three ideas were...
>
> Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
> Do you...?
> Yes id="ans-yes">
> No
>

I go back to the fact radio buttons show mutually-exclusive options, which
makes a very clear yes/no. If your question needs the user to actively
specify a yes or no, it's a good solution. Checkboxes mean one response is
given by omission, which is a less definitive interaction.

Since radio buttons are one element short on their own, you need to wrap
them in a fieldset and legend to essentially act like a label for the set of
radio buttons. I also think the button should be on the left and the text on
the right (in left-to-right languages), since a) that just seems the most
common thing, and b) if you were to add a couple of divs to create rows, the
buttons would line up neatly above each other.

Which gives us...

Do you...?
Yes
No



Hope that helps...

cheers,

Ben


-- 
--- 
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

RE: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Thierry Koblentz]

Hi Lucien,

> I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in
it.
> I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does
anyone have any good UI/UX suggestions?
>
> My three ideas were...
>
> Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
> Do you...?
> Yes
> No
>
> A single check box. A tick implies a "yes" answer while no tick implies
"no"...
> Do you...?
> 
>
> Or a selection list with a "yes" and a "no" answer...
> Do you...?
> 
>   Yes
>   No
> 
>
> Which is the preferred way? Or can you suggest a better way?

I believe screen-readers in form mode do not speak anything besides legends,
labels, and controls. So I would not include information using paragraphs,
I'd try to move this into a label or a legend.

May be something like:

check box | label: I require an interpreter 
select| label: [proper wording here]

As John suggested, the next step is to address the whole i18n problem...


--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz


 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[replica watches Brian]

Yeah, your this structure is good, I think

2010/6/4 Lea de Groot 

> On 4/06/10 2:41 PM, nedlud wrote:
>
>> The full questions in the form is "Do you require an interpreter?"
>> This is followed by: "If so, what language?"
>>
>>
> Personally, I would try this structure:
>
> Do you require a translator?
> o No
> o Yes
>   [] Greek | {"I require a Greek Translator"  written in greek}
>   [] Russian | { "I require a Russian Translator" written in Russian}
>   [] etc
>   [] Other [__ ]
>
> and so on, obviously using the languages appropriate to your population
> segment.
>
> I wouldn't do anything clever with making the language part appear and
> disappear when they select yes/no, as seeing the name of their language in
> the form can help prompt them to check it.
>
> Hope it helps
>
> Lea
> --
> Lea de Groot
> Elysian Systems
> Brisbane, .au
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Lea de Groot]

On 4/06/10 2:41 PM, nedlud wrote:

The full questions in the form is "Do you require an interpreter?"
This is followed by: "If so, what language?"



Personally, I would try this structure:

Do you require a translator?
o No
o Yes
   [] Greek | {"I require a Greek Translator"  written in greek}
   [] Russian | { "I require a Russian Translator" written in Russian}
   [] etc
   [] Other [__ ]

and so on, obviously using the languages appropriate to your population 
segment.


I wouldn't do anything clever with making the language part appear and 
disappear when they select yes/no, as seeing the name of their language 
in the form can help prompt them to check it.


Hope it helps

Lea
--
Lea de Groot
Elysian Systems
Brisbane, .au


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

RE: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[michael.brockington]

There is actually a fourth option, which is a pair of buttons, which is a good 
idea if both choices require an action, such as feeding on to a different form, 
or if this is the last action of the form.

For me, the main thing to think about is 'negative responses' - with a radio 
button you get one answer by default, which may not be the correct response - 
if people don't understand a question they will often ignore it, (a negative 
response) so in your case you should either go with one of the free-choice 
options (ie not a radio button) or else make sure that you word it in such a 
way that people need to change the default if they understand that they do 
_not_ want an interpreter.  If that wasn't clear, think about the difference 
between an opt-out tick-box, and an opt-in tick-box - on paper they are 
interchangeable, but legally speaking they are not.

Regards,
Mike


From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On 
Behalf Of nedlud
Sent: 04 June 2010 03:30
To: wsg
Subject: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in it.
I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does anyone 
have any good UI/UX suggestions?

My three ideas were...

Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
Do you...?
Yes
No

A single check box. A tick implies a "yes" answer while no tick implies "no"...
Do you...?


Or a selection list with a "yes" and a "no" answer...
Do you...?

   Yes
   No


Which is the preferred way? Or can you suggest a better way?

Lucien.

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Krystian Szastok]

John, thank you for the book recommendation, I was waiting for someone
to quote one, so I don't have to make a new thread :)

Kind regards,
Krystian

>>>
>>> In addition to my thoughts I had a look into the Robert Hoekman Jr
>>> book "Designing the Obvious" and in Chapter 16 about Simplifying Long
>>> Forms he cites an example that begins with a series of Yes/No
>>> propositions that given further consideration can be better addressed
>>> by better directed questions and ultimately checkboxes. If you have a
>>> Safari Books Online account you can access this book, or at the least
>>> here is a link to his presentation at Web Directions in 2008;
>>> http://www.webdirections.org/resources/robert-hoekman-jr/ which
>>> contains links to his book on Amazon and an introduction to his
>>> approach.
>>>

>>>
>>> ***
>>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>>> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
>>> ***
>>>
>>
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
>> ***
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***
>
>



-- 
Krystian Szastok
http://www.bozboz.co.uk
http://www.searchoptimist.co.uk


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[John Unsworth]

Lucien,

Interestingly the Robert Hoekman Jr example I cited started originally
as a paper form. In his write up when the form was first put up online
before he came along it ran to page after page, resulting in people
never completing it!

In your example the first thing that strikes me, but this could be a
can of worms (based on your observation about asking a non-English
speaker to advise "What language?" when they might not be able to
understand even that) is either links in the available languages to
the same form in those languages, or at least to a page in the
selected language with information about what to do next - even though
that might mean calling a help line instead, or lastly the form begins
with say language Flag Icons and if someone chooses anything other
than English off to the alternate page or form. That action becomes
your Yes or No scenario.

There was a visitor from the W3C who spoke to the WSG in Melbourne
some time ago now called Richard Ishida who is all about
internationalisation on the web. More links; http://rishida.net/

Cheers,
John Unsworth

On 4 June 2010 14:41, nedlud  wrote:
> Hmm.
> I hadn't considered the wording of the actual question to be so important.
> But I can sure see your point.
> The full questions in the form is "Do you require an interpreter?"
> This is followed by: "If so, what language?"
> I am porting a paper based for onto the web, and the paper based version has
> explicit check boxes for "yes" and "no". But it occurred to me that on the
> web, I could reduce the two check boxes down to one. "Tick the box if you
> require an interpreter." Then dynamically insert the "what language"
> question if they answer yes. (Yes, an obvious problem with all this is that
> the form is all written in English. I guess the client is assuming an
> English speaker is helping the Non-English speaker with the form).
> I often look for the simplest way to represent thing, an in this case, a
> single check box can easily represent both the "yes" and "no" states
> (checked or not checked). But is this the best UX? Are people more
> comfortable with explicit yes/no choices? Even when it might be more verbose
> than absolutely necessary?
> Lucien.
>
> On 4 June 2010 13:29, John Unsworth  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Lucien,
>>
>> The first thing that occurs to me regarding the semantics of the
>> action is what is the Yes/No proposition in regards to, and that this
>> might provide a clearer notion as to what to do.
>>
>> By this what I mean is, in the first instance so far as semantic mark
>> up is concerned it would appear that a radio button is exactly what
>> you would use. Here it is a case of either on or off. Yes or no.
>>
>> However the first thing I thought of, and I suppose this is in more
>> regards a UI/UX consideration is the design pattern we see with
>> webmail clients and the "Remember me" check box.
>>
>> So returning to the first point, are you simply asking for a Yes/No
>> action or like the "Remember me" function a call to action with an
>> Option Yes or Option No result? In which case your question might be
>> rephrased by improving the microcopy of your markup. Instead of "Do
>> you..?" the semantics are improved by fixing the proposition, ie;
>> "Remember me for 2 weeks" - tick on = Yes, un-ticked = No, or another
>> example, rather than "Would you like to receive our email newsletter?"
>> radio buttons Yes/No, checkbox pre-selected followed by "Uncheck if
>> you would not like to receive our email newsletter."
>>
>> In addition to my thoughts I had a look into the Robert Hoekman Jr
>> book "Designing the Obvious" and in Chapter 16 about Simplifying Long
>> Forms he cites an example that begins with a series of Yes/No
>> propositions that given further consideration can be better addressed
>> by better directed questions and ultimately checkboxes. If you have a
>> Safari Books Online account you can access this book, or at the least
>> here is a link to his presentation at Web Directions in 2008;
>> http://www.webdirections.org/resources/robert-hoekman-jr/ which
>> contains links to his book on Amazon and an introduction to his
>> approach.
>>
>> But I'll try and quickly summarise it for you. Original form starts -
>> "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision coverage..with Acme
>> Insurance" = Radio Button Yes/No.
>> Second iteration - "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
>> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = Radio Button Yes, then checkbox's for
>> Medical, Dental, Vision - Radio Button No.
>> Third iteration - Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
>> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = checkbox's for Medical, Dental,
>> Vision - implied is if you don't check any, you would of selected No.
>>
>> So to sum up, before it's a question of which is the best markup to
>> use, what is the actual end result of this action and can it be
>> handled a better way?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> John Unsworth
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:
>> > 

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[Gregorio Hernández Caso]

Hi Lucien,

In my opinion, this is the best structure for yes/no options:

Do you...?
 Yes
 No

Cheers,
Greg



On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:41 PM, nedlud  wrote:

> Hmm.
>
> I hadn't considered the wording of the actual question to be so important.
> But I can sure see your point.
>
> The full questions in the form is "Do you require an interpreter?"
> This is followed by: "If so, what language?"
>
> I am porting a paper based for onto the web, and the paper based version
> has explicit check boxes for "yes" and "no". But it occurred to me that on
> the web, I could reduce the two check boxes down to one. "Tick the box if
> you require an interpreter." Then dynamically insert the "what language"
> question if they answer yes. (Yes, an obvious problem with all this is that
> the form is all written in English. I guess the client is assuming an
> English speaker is helping the Non-English speaker with the form).
>
> I often look for the simplest way to represent thing, an in this case, a
> single check box can easily represent both the "yes" and "no" states
> (checked or not checked). But is this the best UX? Are people more
> comfortable with explicit yes/no choices? Even when it might be more verbose
> than absolutely necessary?
>
> Lucien.
>
>
> On 4 June 2010 13:29, John Unsworth  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lucien,
>>
>> The first thing that occurs to me regarding the semantics of the
>> action is what is the Yes/No proposition in regards to, and that this
>> might provide a clearer notion as to what to do.
>>
>> By this what I mean is, in the first instance so far as semantic mark
>> up is concerned it would appear that a radio button is exactly what
>> you would use. Here it is a case of either on or off. Yes or no.
>>
>> However the first thing I thought of, and I suppose this is in more
>> regards a UI/UX consideration is the design pattern we see with
>> webmail clients and the "Remember me" check box.
>>
>> So returning to the first point, are you simply asking for a Yes/No
>> action or like the "Remember me" function a call to action with an
>> Option Yes or Option No result? In which case your question might be
>> rephrased by improving the microcopy of your markup. Instead of "Do
>> you..?" the semantics are improved by fixing the proposition, ie;
>> "Remember me for 2 weeks" - tick on = Yes, un-ticked = No, or another
>> example, rather than "Would you like to receive our email newsletter?"
>> radio buttons Yes/No, checkbox pre-selected followed by "Uncheck if
>> you would not like to receive our email newsletter."
>>
>> In addition to my thoughts I had a look into the Robert Hoekman Jr
>> book "Designing the Obvious" and in Chapter 16 about Simplifying Long
>> Forms he cites an example that begins with a series of Yes/No
>> propositions that given further consideration can be better addressed
>> by better directed questions and ultimately checkboxes. If you have a
>> Safari Books Online account you can access this book, or at the least
>> here is a link to his presentation at Web Directions in 2008;
>> http://www.webdirections.org/resources/robert-hoekman-jr/ which
>> contains links to his book on Amazon and an introduction to his
>> approach.
>>
>> But I'll try and quickly summarise it for you. Original form starts -
>> "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision coverage..with Acme
>> Insurance" = Radio Button Yes/No.
>> Second iteration - "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
>> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = Radio Button Yes, then checkbox's for
>> Medical, Dental, Vision - Radio Button No.
>> Third iteration - Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
>> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = checkbox's for Medical, Dental,
>> Vision - implied is if you don't check any, you would of selected No.
>>
>> So to sum up, before it's a question of which is the best markup to
>> use, what is the actual end result of this action and can it be
>> handled a better way?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> John Unsworth
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:
>> > I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in
>> it.
>> > I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does
>> anyone
>> > have any good UI/UX suggestions?
>> > My three ideas were...
>> > Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
>> > Do you...?
>> > Yes> id="ans-yes">
>> > No> id="ans-no">
>> > A single check box. A tick implies a "yes" answer while no tick implies
>> > "no"...
>> > Do you...?
>> > 
>> > Or a selection list with a "yes" and a "no" answer...
>> > Do you...?
>> > 
>> >Yes
>> >No
>> > 
>> > Which is the preferred way? Or can you suggest a better way?
>> > Lucien.
>> > ***
>> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
>> > *

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[nedlud]

Hmm.

I hadn't considered the wording of the actual question to be so important.
But I can sure see your point.

The full questions in the form is "Do you require an interpreter?"
This is followed by: "If so, what language?"

I am porting a paper based for onto the web, and the paper based version has
explicit check boxes for "yes" and "no". But it occurred to me that on the
web, I could reduce the two check boxes down to one. "Tick the box if you
require an interpreter." Then dynamically insert the "what language"
question if they answer yes. (Yes, an obvious problem with all this is that
the form is all written in English. I guess the client is assuming an
English speaker is helping the Non-English speaker with the form).

I often look for the simplest way to represent thing, an in this case, a
single check box can easily represent both the "yes" and "no" states
(checked or not checked). But is this the best UX? Are people more
comfortable with explicit yes/no choices? Even when it might be more verbose
than absolutely necessary?

Lucien.

On 4 June 2010 13:29, John Unsworth  wrote:

> Hi Lucien,
>
> The first thing that occurs to me regarding the semantics of the
> action is what is the Yes/No proposition in regards to, and that this
> might provide a clearer notion as to what to do.
>
> By this what I mean is, in the first instance so far as semantic mark
> up is concerned it would appear that a radio button is exactly what
> you would use. Here it is a case of either on or off. Yes or no.
>
> However the first thing I thought of, and I suppose this is in more
> regards a UI/UX consideration is the design pattern we see with
> webmail clients and the "Remember me" check box.
>
> So returning to the first point, are you simply asking for a Yes/No
> action or like the "Remember me" function a call to action with an
> Option Yes or Option No result? In which case your question might be
> rephrased by improving the microcopy of your markup. Instead of "Do
> you..?" the semantics are improved by fixing the proposition, ie;
> "Remember me for 2 weeks" - tick on = Yes, un-ticked = No, or another
> example, rather than "Would you like to receive our email newsletter?"
> radio buttons Yes/No, checkbox pre-selected followed by "Uncheck if
> you would not like to receive our email newsletter."
>
> In addition to my thoughts I had a look into the Robert Hoekman Jr
> book "Designing the Obvious" and in Chapter 16 about Simplifying Long
> Forms he cites an example that begins with a series of Yes/No
> propositions that given further consideration can be better addressed
> by better directed questions and ultimately checkboxes. If you have a
> Safari Books Online account you can access this book, or at the least
> here is a link to his presentation at Web Directions in 2008;
> http://www.webdirections.org/resources/robert-hoekman-jr/ which
> contains links to his book on Amazon and an introduction to his
> approach.
>
> But I'll try and quickly summarise it for you. Original form starts -
> "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision coverage..with Acme
> Insurance" = Radio Button Yes/No.
> Second iteration - "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = Radio Button Yes, then checkbox's for
> Medical, Dental, Vision - Radio Button No.
> Third iteration - Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
> coverage..with Acme Insurance" = checkbox's for Medical, Dental,
> Vision - implied is if you don't check any, you would of selected No.
>
> So to sum up, before it's a question of which is the best markup to
> use, what is the actual end result of this action and can it be
> handled a better way?
>
> Cheers,
> John Unsworth
>
>
>
> On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:
> > I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in
> it.
> > I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does
> anyone
> > have any good UI/UX suggestions?
> > My three ideas were...
> > Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
> > Do you...?
> > Yes id="ans-yes">
> > No
> > A single check box. A tick implies a "yes" answer while no tick implies
> > "no"...
> > Do you...?
> > 
> > Or a selection list with a "yes" and a "no" answer...
> > Do you...?
> > 
> >Yes
> >No
> > 
> > Which is the preferred way? Or can you suggest a better way?
> > Lucien.
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> > ***
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> 

Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?

[John Unsworth]

Hi Lucien,

The first thing that occurs to me regarding the semantics of the
action is what is the Yes/No proposition in regards to, and that this
might provide a clearer notion as to what to do.

By this what I mean is, in the first instance so far as semantic mark
up is concerned it would appear that a radio button is exactly what
you would use. Here it is a case of either on or off. Yes or no.

However the first thing I thought of, and I suppose this is in more
regards a UI/UX consideration is the design pattern we see with
webmail clients and the "Remember me" check box.

So returning to the first point, are you simply asking for a Yes/No
action or like the "Remember me" function a call to action with an
Option Yes or Option No result? In which case your question might be
rephrased by improving the microcopy of your markup. Instead of "Do
you..?" the semantics are improved by fixing the proposition, ie;
"Remember me for 2 weeks" - tick on = Yes, un-ticked = No, or another
example, rather than "Would you like to receive our email newsletter?"
radio buttons Yes/No, checkbox pre-selected followed by "Uncheck if
you would not like to receive our email newsletter."

In addition to my thoughts I had a look into the Robert Hoekman Jr
book "Designing the Obvious" and in Chapter 16 about Simplifying Long
Forms he cites an example that begins with a series of Yes/No
propositions that given further consideration can be better addressed
by better directed questions and ultimately checkboxes. If you have a
Safari Books Online account you can access this book, or at the least
here is a link to his presentation at Web Directions in 2008;
http://www.webdirections.org/resources/robert-hoekman-jr/ which
contains links to his book on Amazon and an introduction to his
approach.

But I'll try and quickly summarise it for you. Original form starts -
"Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision coverage..with Acme
Insurance" = Radio Button Yes/No.
Second iteration - "Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
coverage..with Acme Insurance" = Radio Button Yes, then checkbox's for
Medical, Dental, Vision - Radio Button No.
Third iteration - Do you...have any Group Medical, Dental or Vision
coverage..with Acme Insurance" = checkbox's for Medical, Dental,
Vision - implied is if you don't check any, you would of selected No.

So to sum up, before it's a question of which is the best markup to
use, what is the actual end result of this action and can it be
handled a better way?

Cheers,
John Unsworth



On 4 June 2010 12:29, nedlud  wrote:
> I have a web form I'm building and there is a simple yes/no question in it.
> I got to wondering what the best semantic  mark up for this is? Does anyone
> have any good UI/UX suggestions?
> My three ideas were...
> Two radio buttons for "yes" and "no"...
> Do you...?
> Yes
> No
> A single check box. A tick implies a "yes" answer while no tick implies
> "no"...
> Do you...?
> 
> Or a selection list with a "yes" and a "no" answer...
> Do you...?
> 
>    Yes
>    No
> 
> Which is the preferred way? Or can you suggest a better way?
> Lucien.
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> ***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***