Re: [WSG] Yes/No structure?
On 7 June 2010 14:58, Steve Gibbings st...@stevegibbings.co.uk 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 -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- 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?
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 st...@stevegibbings.co.uk 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 -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- 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?
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 ***
