who is your target audience?
If they are basic desktop users and not technical, then you want to
use language they understand rather than the technical language.
"Commit changes" is too technical, and you should never mix the
commits in any one view. I like the "Save changes" suggestion.
by:
In some places, changes are "committed" as soon as you enter them, a
bit
like how Microsoft Access operates. In other places, the user has to
specifically "save" to commit changes, like MYOB.
Are you saying these differences are on one page or view or in
different pages or views?
Personally, I would be pretty pissed off if, while editing a record,
some items commit instantly and others only commit on "save". The
instant commits would make me think the others were instant too and/or
the "on save" commits would make me think my changes would commit only
after the save. If you mix things up like this you need to be pretty
clear some are destructive and others less so.
If you were to do this you would definitely need to have a revert
function that takes the record completely back to where it was before
any changes were carried out.
I agree with Elizabeth in that you should let people modify their view/
page before any commit.
Joe
On Apr 11, 2008, at 04:33, Elizabeth Spiegel wrote:
Hi Jessica
As a user, I am really annoyed by applications that don't work
consistently
- they're much harder to learn (at work I have to use one that
labels the
same tool a 'Power search' in one place and an 'Advanced search' in
another).
I would prefer to see a 'save changes' button (or similar) as the
consistent
approach - it provides an opportunity to review before you save
something
awful.
Elizabeth
Web editor
www.spiegelweb.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jessica Enders
Sent: Thursday, 10 April 2008 11:38 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Standard for "committing" changes to a database?
Hi everyone
I am currently reviewing a desktop application that involves mostly
viewing
and changing records in a database (via a nice GUI front end).
In some places, changes are "committed" as soon as you enter them, a
bit
like how Microsoft Access operates. In other places, the user has to
specifically "save" to commit changes, like MYOB.
Any opinions on when one approach should be used over the other and
whether
the inconsistency matters?
Thanks in anticipation,
Jessica Enders
Director
Formulate Information Design
----------------------------------------
http://formulate.com.au
----------------------------------------
Phone: (02) 6116 8765
Fax: (02) 8456 5916
PO Box 5108
Braddon ACT 2612
----------------------------------------
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
==========
Joe Ortenzi
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
