Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields and feedback for current interface

2015-07-06 Thread Jean Cavallo
2015-07-05 9:41 GMT+02:00 Cédric Krier cedric.kr...@b2ck.com:

 I think the info which currently just says 'Invalid form' will need to
 be improved to give the name of the field with error and also I think we
 can give a explaination for:

 - required is simple: Field is required
 - domain invalid: Field must follow: domain parsed
   (only if we can parse it otherwise: Field is not valid for domain)


Love this !

Jean Cavallo
*Coopengo*


Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields and feedback for current interface

2015-07-05 Thread Cédric Krier
On 2015-07-04 12:32, Mathias Behrle wrote:
 * Jordi Esteve:  Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields (Sat, 04 Jul 2015 
 10:49:44
   +0200):
  On 04/07/15 08:58, Cédric Krier wrote:
   Hi,
  
   For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and
   switch to red when validated as empty).
   I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons:
  
- the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some
  thèmes.
  
- it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is
  only based on color.
  
   So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the
   required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and
   readable for accessibility.
  
   What do you think? Has anyone a better idea?
  
  
  I suggest to not remove the current behaviour. The blue color and 
  switching to red if the field is not filled is intuitive and clear for 
  most people, the asterisk is not intuitive (needs a previous 
  explanation), so I suggest adding a * without removing current behaviour.
 
 Marking a field with a star is On/Off, while currently with colors we have the
 evidence, that a field is required *and* showing after the validation,
 which fields missed the validation. So by replacing colors with stars we would
 lose one information level. Perhaps this could be solved by differentiating 
 with
 small and big star (small for required field, big for missing validation).

I think the info which currently just says 'Invalid form' will need to
be improved to give the name of the field with error and also I think we
can give a explaination for:

- required is simple: Field is required
- domain invalid: Field must follow: domain parsed
  (only if we can parse it otherwise: Field is not valid for domain)

Also keep in mind, that the colors by default has no meaning, it has now
for current users because they learn it. But it is really not so obvious
for newbie, I'm often astonished by seeing new user not understand what
it means a bleu colored field.
I agree that a '*' on the label also need to be learn but we can teach
user by setting a tooltip on it and with my proposal for info.

 OTOH I would appreciate indeed, that the idea to surround the field with a red
 line instead of coloring the background would make its way [0].
 This change would make the interface less shouting, but more informative.

I did not find any property in GTK that will allow it.

-- 
Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL
Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/


pgpoWcKxtHw4f.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields and feedback for current interface

2015-07-04 Thread Mathias Behrle
* Jordi Esteve:  Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields (Sat, 04 Jul 2015 10:49:44
  +0200):

 On 04/07/15 08:58, Cédric Krier wrote:
  Hi,
 
  For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and
  switch to red when validated as empty).
  I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons:
 
   - the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some
 thèmes.
 
   - it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is
 only based on color.
 
  So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the
  required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and
  readable for accessibility.
 
  What do you think? Has anyone a better idea?
 
 
 I suggest to not remove the current behaviour. The blue color and 
 switching to red if the field is not filled is intuitive and clear for 
 most people, the asterisk is not intuitive (needs a previous 
 explanation), so I suggest adding a * without removing current behaviour.

Marking a field with a star is On/Off, while currently with colors we have the
evidence, that a field is required *and* showing after the validation,
which fields missed the validation. So by replacing colors with stars we would
lose one information level. Perhaps this could be solved by differentiating with
small and big star (small for required field, big for missing validation).

OTOH I would appreciate indeed, that the idea to surround the field with a red
line instead of coloring the background would make its way [0].
This change would make the interface less shouting, but more informative.

BTW the current state after [1] indeed confirms my reservations about a
unsteady moving interface [2]. You did your best to make it unobtrusive, but
the result is nevertheless, that after clicking a record and shifting of the
interface the mouse pointer is located above a different record and the user
has to re-orientate himself. I really don't like those unintentional jumping
interfaces on user interactions, perhaps other Trytonistas could give feedback
as well.
Even if in sao the info bar should be better placed at the top (I didn't have a
look at that), this shouldn't dictate the behavior of the gtk client. I don't
feel it to be the right approach to try to copy *slavishly* the gtk and the web
interface. Both interfaces have different pros and cons. When the web interface
affords different means for informational messages, the gtk client shouldn't
lose parts of his usability just to match the layout of this info bar in the
web client.

Just last but not least: I would prefer to have the messages centered like in
the initial proposal [3]. Currently they display left-aligned.


[0] https://bugs.tryton.org/msg20371
[1] http://hg.tryton.org/tryton/rev/4aabbd421cf5
[2] https://bugs.tryton.org/issue3465
[3] https://bugs.tryton.org/file2223/form_error.png

-- 

Mathias Behrle
MBSolutions
Gilgenmatten 10 A
D-79114 Freiburg

Tel: +49(761)471023
Fax: +49(761)4770816
http://www.m9s.biz
UStIdNr: DE 142009020
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6


pgpkMU6crk1XU.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP