Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
This is why I never really got into widget components in Flash - they tend to default to a Windows 'classic' skin which would be useless for Mac users and those who skin their browsers. Providing a skin for the component based on a user agent string would also be useless given it can be faked and given users can skin Mozilla/Opera to look like any browser. Good idea for swf applications, though. Cheers James It's also for this very same reason that I dislike what Mozilla does with form widgets, which (at least on Mac OS 9 & OS X) differ dramatically from the rest of the OS. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 04:03 PM, Taco Fleur wrote: Agreed, a lot of users are not dumb, so they also understand that its a button even when on mouseover the cursor turns into a hand|pointer, so it would be more wise (IMHO) to think about that % that is not so familiar with the web. They will be familiar with the OS before they are familiar with the web. Browser and OS default buttons LOOK like buttons, and behave (more or less) the same across all applications. This is called familiarity. Familiarity is a very strong part of user experience. In your own oppinion, do you think a new internet user or inexperienced user would understand that he can click the button when it turns into a hand|pointer or when the cursor does nothing when moving over the button? I believe if the W3 had set this as a recommendation, then it would be a good thing, but since they haven't, they have left it up to the browser and Operating System manufacturers to decide what happens. The user becomes familiar with those defaults. Whether they're better or worse defaults in nearly irrelevant, because of basic numbers involved. There are millions or even billions of web pages out there. Even if you, and all your friends, and all their friends all decided to implement this cursor, you'd still be in the minority (not even .001% of all pages), hence you would be going against: - what the W3 recommends (or has not recommended) - what most (if not all) UA's and OS's do by default - what the user is familiar with Do you really want to do that??? I have seen people style buttons so that they blend in with the whole desing, see http://www.zeldman.com scroll to the bottom, see that button, if the cursor changed on mouse-over it would have been much clearer that its a clickable object. To me anyway. That's all fine, but the point is that this behaviour you want to implement (which nobody is stopping from doing) is not the default behaviour for most UA's... implementing it means changing the way a user's OWN ENVIRONMENT behaves and responds. Again, do you really want to do that? Exactamento! A user always has to learn the interface, buttons can always be different, so what IF the cursor ALWAYS turned into a hand|pointer how much quicker will they understand your interface? Not as quick as leaving the button alone and living with the default styling and behaviour that they KNOW and LOVE and TRUST. Let's look at it from the other angle. A hand|pointer is what people rely on for links -- it says so in the W3 specs as well. Since designers though it'd be cool to remove underlines from links, and change the colour of them (both of which I'm guilty of too) THIS IS THE ONLY VISUAL CUE that this is a link to another page/resource. Buttons are not links. In fact, clicking on quite a lot of buttons will/may produce no new page at all (think about any client-side JS action, including form validation). Your argument may be to only change the button to a pointer on all buttons which WILL result in a new page, but then that's adding more and more confusion. No matter what your argument, I'll more than likely come back with this: The user should have to learn as little as possible, and should have as much consistency and familiarity as possible. If the W3, Microsoft, Apple or even Mozilla decide that all buttons should have pointer icons, I'll be fine with it -- because the user of that browser/OS will become familiar with it very quick, and it will become their standard too. If one designer (or even a bunch of them) choose to implement it on their own, I think it's stupid, because it changes the behaviour of the interface. Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
> Not proposing anything, just want to hear the opinion of other people on this matter, see if there is a valid point that will > make me think otherwise about my opinion ;-)) Just because I have an opinion doesn't mean its the right one - therefore I like > to debate it... If looks like a button in the UI then it should behave like a button in the UI. If you have completely restyled it beyond "button recoginition", then do whatever your interface needs/wants to do. I think the point that the majority are making is that "don't play with the widgets the come from the operating system". My "caveat" on that would be "unless you are just using the underlying functionality and completely changing it". Gary Menzel Web Development Manager IT Operations Brisbane -+- ABN AMRO Morgans Limited Level 29, 123 Eagle Street BRISBANE QLD 4000 PH: 07 333 44 828 FX: 07 3834 0828 If this communication is not intended for you and you are not an authorised recipient of this email you are prohibited by law from dealing with or relying on the email or any file attachments. This prohibition includes reading, printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, storing or in any other way dealing or acting in reliance on the information. If you have received this email in error, we request you contact ABN AMRO Morgans Limited immediately by returning the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and destroy the original. We will refund any reasonable costs associated with notifying ABN AMRO Morgans. This email is confidential and may contain privileged client information. ABN AMRO Morgans has taken reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and integrity of all its communications, including electronic communications, but accepts no liability for materials transmitted. Materials may also be transmitted without the knowledge of ABN AMRO Morgans. ABN AMRO Morgans Limited its directors and employees do not accept liability for the results of any actions taken or not on the basis of the information in this report. ABN AMRO Morgans Limited and its associates hold or may hold securities in the companies/trusts mentioned herein. Any recommendation is made on the basis of our research of the investment and may not suit the specific requirements of clients. Assessments of suitability to an individual?s portfolio can only be made after an examination of the particular client?s investments, financial circumstances and requirements. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 02:50 PM, Taco Fleur wrote: Ok, I know what it says, but to me it represents a hand holding a mouse and the index finger in the click position. NO! That may be what the icon looks like for YOU in YOUR ENVIRONMENT but it may look completely different on another OS, or even on a system which has a theme installed. You'll note that the W3 doesn't say: pointer The cursor is a pointer that indicates a link, and should look like a finger holding a mouse. What happens in 5 years time when the concept of a mouse is forgotten in favour of speech, touch screens with pens, or some technology that hasn't even been invented yet??? I reckon this icon is chosen so that it creates clarity for a user in regards to the object being a clickable object. I button in that matter to me is also a clickable object. It's also part of the standard OS interface (in general), so each instance of a button should behave like the others again, only my opinion. We don't have to agree :) Justin * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
We don't have to agree at all, but here's my point. A lot of users are *not* dumb. They realise that links aren't always underlined with blue text. They realise that buttons may not always look like what they're used to -- this is good for you. --- Agreed, a lot of users are not dumb, so they also understand that its a button even when on mouseover the cursor turns into a hand|pointer, so it would be more wise (IMHO) to think about that % that is not so familiar with the web. In your own oppinion, do you think a new internet user or inexperienced user would understand that he can click the button when it turns into a hand|pointer or when the cursor does nothing when moving over the button? I have seen people style buttons so that they blend in with the whole desing, see http://www.zeldman.com scroll to the bottom, see that button, if the cursor changed on mouse-over it would have been much clearer that its a clickable object. To me anyway. --- However, the majority (guess only) of webpages the user visits are styled with default buttons. Even if only 25% of sites are using default buttons, it's still a SIGNIFICANT NUMBER more sites that your ONE INTERFACE which is different. --- Not sure what your saying here? --- So they visit your site, with buttons that are styled differently -- no matter how insignificant the task appears, the user still has to *learn* your interface (and *remember* it) -- which is a task my websites will not (generally) ask them to do too much of. --- Exactamento! A user always has to learn the interface, buttons can always be different, so what IF the cursor ALWAYS turned into a hand|pointer how much quicker will they understand your interface? --- You seem to be proposing a 'developer recommendation' (to be taken up by some developers), whereas I'd much rather follow a 'w3 recommendation' (which all standards compliant browsers and developers will follow). --- Not proposing anything, just want to hear the opinion of other people on this matter, see if there is a valid point that will make me think otherwise about my opinion ;-)) Just because I have an opinion doesn't mean its the right one - therefore I like to debate it... --- Sorry for the long post! Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 02:21 PM, Taco Fleur wrote: Any more ideas on this matter from other people? What your saying makes sense in a way - but I reckon it is not a valid argument not to classify the button as a clickable object and make this visible. I didn't say it wasn't clickable. I just said it should behave like other buttons that the user is used to interacting with. As has been pointed out by other posters, main application menus in your OS are probably not marked with a pointer -- in fact, none of the icons on my OS X or XP Pro desktops have a 'finger' style pointer at all -- they all use an arrow. If I understand you correctly you are saying we should not touch the design of a button because it could confuse the user, that would mean every website would have GREY buttons. No, you'd end up with lots of DEFAULT buttons, not specifically GREY ones. Safari and Camino's buttons are always styled by Aqua (OS X plastic buttons), ignoring whatever author styles you provide. Windows XP's default styling of form buttons isn't quite as drastic, but on mouseover, they do get shaded with a yellow glow on the edges (at least on my set-up). I personally think you can style the buttons as much as you like, as long as they are CONSISTENT throughout your site. We don't have to agree at all, but here's my point. A lot of users are *not* dumb. They realise that links aren't always underlined with blue text. They realise that buttons may not always look like what they're used to -- this is good for you. However, the majority (guess only) of webpages the user visits are styled with default buttons. Even if only 25% of sites are using default buttons, it's still a SIGNIFICANT NUMBER more sites that your ONE INTERFACE which is different. So they visit your site, with buttons that are styled differently -- no matter how insignificant the task appears, the user still has to *learn* your interface (and *remember* it) -- which is a task my websites will not (generally) ask them to do too much of. I *do* have exceptions to the rule though. For example, it might make sense for a "delete" button to be red in a CMS -- but I'd always opt for the most minimalist styling possible (eg JUST the background or text color) so that the user has as much familiarity as possible. I still wouldn't style the pointer. I personally hate the fact these widgets are styled by the OS, it's the Internet not the OS we are working with! - there should be a standard style defined not by the OS but by all the browsers IMHO.. ;-)) I semi-agree here. Safari is breaking away from standards by not providing ways to style their buttons. However, your original post was about changing the pointer on a button away from the original action as specified by the browsers defaults, or even the OS's defaults. By doing so, you are decreasing the familiarity of the button to the user in THIER environment. You seem to be proposing a 'developer recommendation' (to be taken up by some developers), whereas I'd much rather follow a 'w3 recommendation' (which all standards compliant browsers and developers will follow). Sorry for the long post! Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
If I understand you correctly you are saying we should not touch the design of a button because it could confuse the user, that would mean every website would have GREY buttons. I personally think you can style the buttons as much as you like, as long as they are CONSISTENT throughout your site. I think the point being indicated to the user in using the default button is that this is a button that operates like any other button on their OS. On Mac OS X for example default buttons are a recognisable blue as are other form elements therefore a user (and we mustn't forget that many users do not distinguish the actions of a web page in a browser from those in any other application on their OS) has an expectation of it's functionality. Note that functionality includes all the states of that element as well, such as on focus, on click, etc. One of the problems I find with "designed" buttons is they tend to be biased towards the OS the developer knows. For example seeing XP like buttons on a page viewed in OS X is not intuitive or particularly attractive. The main problem is that to change a button and maintain consistency you need to change the styling of other elements, such as a drop-down, as well. There are of course good reasons for either solution and it's true that the main importance is consistency. The question is what is "consistent" for an average user: the look of the buttons on a single site v's other sites v's the ones on their OS? Also, not to be disregarded; who is the end user of your site, savvy or non-savvy, and how much does this allow you to play around with their computer using comfort zone. Nick * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
> Ok, I know what it says, but to me it represents a hand holding a > mouse and the index finger in the click position. > I reckon this icon is chosen so that it creates clarity for a > user in regards to the object being a clickable object. > > I button in that matter to me is also a clickable object. That's what I meant before - the concept of "clickable" is represented by an arrow in windows NOT a hand. Mouse over anything on your screen (outside the browser) that is clickable & you will get an arrow cursor - not a hand. I'm not saying I disagree with you - if I ran the world every clickable item would have a hand cursor, parking attendants would have to walk around in clown suits, ciggie butts would evaporate when you finish your smoke and well we probably should not go too far down this path. But you get what I mean. In the real world arrow (windows) hand does not mean clickable. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: 9956 6388 Mob: 0410 458 201 Fax: 9956 8433 http://www.gruden.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
Title: Rave or Valid point If I look at it from a usability perspective then we should not assume that people know that - that is really the whole point i'm trying to make. PS: I hope this topic is not considered OFF-TOPIC? -Original Message-From: Andrew Cheong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, 19 January 2004 1:55 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point Well, what you're saying is true, but the buttons are obviously clickable. People know that. As opposed to text links, where people might not know they are clickable until the cursor changes. I guess you do have a point. - Original Message - From: Taco Fleur To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 8:20 PM Subject: [WSG] Rave or Valid point What do you reckon, a Rave or Valid point? http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/archive/2004/01/?141800 Tell me and I will forgetShow me and I will rememberTeach me and I will learn
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
Title: Rave or Valid point Well, what you're saying is true, but the buttons are obviously clickable. People know that. As opposed to text links, where people might not know they are clickable until the cursor changes. I guess you do have a point. - Original Message - From: Taco Fleur To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 8:20 PM Subject: [WSG] Rave or Valid point What do you reckon, a Rave or Valid point? http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/archive/2004/01/?141800 Tell me and I will forgetShow me and I will rememberTeach me and I will learn
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
Ok, I know what it says, but to me it represents a hand holding a mouse and the index finger in the click position. I reckon this icon is chosen so that it creates clarity for a user in regards to the object being a clickable object. I button in that matter to me is also a clickable object. But as I said, I could completely mis the point as I often do ;-) -Original Message- From: Mark Stanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 19 January 2004 1:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point > What do reckon it does represent then? The pointer that is. >From the spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ui.html#cursor-props): pointer The cursor is a pointer that indicates a link. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: 9956 6388 Mob: 0410 458 201 Fax: 9956 8433 http://www.gruden.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
> What do reckon it does represent then? The pointer that is. >From the spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ui.html#cursor-props): pointer The cursor is a pointer that indicates a link. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: 9956 6388 Mob: 0410 458 201 Fax: 9956 8433 http://www.gruden.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 02:08 PM, Chris Blown wrote: Yes, I get the same with Firebird under Linux, though gtk1/2 support is much better than it once was. Is Camino still in development? Its uses native widgets, doesn't it? Yes it does, but I've heard there's a hurdle with Panther (wouldn't know for sure, because I'm still on Jaguar). It's been at 0.7 for a while now (March 6th 2003), but there's a news post dated Nov 4th which hints that there's still progress. Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
I think you are looking for cursor:pointer (hand does not exist) - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ui.html#cursor-props You are correct, hand is a windows thingy. I will adjust my text accordingly. Also I disagree with the idea that hand == clickable. Mouse over your file menu (in windows) or any other button menu item for that matter & you get the arrow not the hand. What do reckon it does represent then? The pointer that is. I think defaults are generally the better option in this case, however I will use pointer when I have a onclick event on something. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: 9956 6388 Mob: 0410 458 201 Fax: 9956 8433 http://www.gruden.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
Form widgets come from the user's OS (Operating System) or UA (User Agent/Browser), and (IMHO) should behave in a manner to which the user is accustomed. Adding a cursor hand to the button may seem like you're helping the user by adding a visual cue, but you may in fact be confusing the user, and degrading the user experience. -- Any more ideas on this matter from other people? What your saying makes sense in a way - but I reckon it is not a valid argument not to classify the button as a clickable object and make this visible. If I understand you correctly you are saying we should not touch the design of a button because it could confuse the user, that would mean every website would have GREY buttons. I personally think you can style the buttons as much as you like, as long as they are CONSISTENT throughout your site. -- It's for this very same reason that I try not to style form elements much beyond their default stylings as supplied by the OS/UA. It's also for this very same reason that I dislike what Mozilla does with form widgets, which (at least on Mac OS 9 & OS X) differ dramatically from the rest of the OS. -- I personally hate the fact these widgets are styled by the OS, it's the Internet not the OS we are working with! - there should be a standard style defined not by the OS but by all the browsers IMHO.. ;-)) More feedback welcome.. -- The only time I'd use "cursor: hand;" is if the object's action was implemented with a JS onlick='' event, rather than a ... tag. But I can't see this happening too often, given that non-JS users would be disadvantaged. Extensive user testing would reveal the true answers though. Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
I think you are looking for cursor:pointer (hand does not exist) - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ui.html#cursor-props Also I disagree with the idea that hand == clickable. Mouse over your file menu (in windows) or any other button menu item for that matter & you get the arrow not the hand. I think defaults are generally the better option in this case, however I will use pointer when I have a onclick event on something. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: 9956 6388 Mob: 0410 458 201 Fax: 9956 8433 http://www.gruden.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
Yes, I get the same with Firebird under Linux, though gtk1/2 support is much better than it once was. Is Camino still in development? Its uses native widgets, doesn't it? ChrisB > It's also for this very same reason that I dislike what Mozilla does > with form widgets, which (at least on Mac OS 9 & OS X) differ > dramatically from the rest of the OS. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Rave or Valid point
On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 12:20 PM, Taco Fleur wrote: What do you reckon, a Rave or Valid point? http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/archive/2004/01/?141800 My answer (also posted as a blog comment): Form widgets come from the user's OS (Operating System) or UA (User Agent/Browser), and (IMHO) should behave in a manner to which the user is accustomed. Adding a cursor hand to the button may seem like you're helping the user by adding a visual cue, but you may in fact be confusing the user, and degrading the user experience. It's for this very same reason that I try not to style form elements much beyond their default stylings as supplied by the OS/UA. It's also for this very same reason that I dislike what Mozilla does with form widgets, which (at least on Mac OS 9 & OS X) differ dramatically from the rest of the OS. The only time I'd use "cursor: hand;" is if the object's action was implemented with a JS onlick='' event, rather than a ... tag. But I can't see this happening too often, given that non-JS users would be disadvantaged. Extensive user testing would reveal the true answers though. Justin French * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
