https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49018
--- Comment #6 from Isarra <zhoris...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to comment #5) > Would someone care to explain why "redundant" is inherently a bad thing. It looks bad, it can potentially insult or worse yet, confuse users (instruction overload is a real thing), and it's more to translate. It is also, in this case, utterly unnecessary. > Visual redundancy like this isn't entirely uncommon or bad. Sometimes the > repetition with slight variance can subtly make something easier to > understand. Common isn't necessarily a good thing or a bad thing - it's just a norm. For more complex things you might be right about different explanations helping users to understand, but a login form is far from complex. And consider this - if someone honestly cannot figure out the login form for any reason besides a real bug, do we even want them? Picture them trying to figure out the edit or upload forms, let alone even more complex issues such as copyright, behavioural guidelines, content policy... > The "redundant is bad" sentiment here looks like a common mistake of > developers > thinking something is bad based on some form of logic which doesn't > necessarily > always match up with reality. First you say it's common to be redundant and then it's common to consider redundancy bad. I'd say to make up your mind, but I'm not sure it's all that important either way - the specific use case we're worrying about should be far more relevant than what is common in general. This also might explain why both things might be common - the correct approach depends on what you're doing, not on what everyone else is doing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
