Re: [Usability] Disclosure triangles

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>]

On 28Dec2001 02:34PM (-0800), George wrote:
> 
> While I can't argue on the 'elegance', I could argue on the
> 'self-documentation' aspect.  I find it easier to understand a "More >>"
> button.  Since it's a button, so I know I can press it.  And it says it will
> give me "More" things.  The only reason I think a triangle can give me more
> things is that I got used to triangles from tree widgets (which are not
> really common).

On the Mac, most people got used to them from the file manager (where
they appear all the time in the outline view, which they have in place
of a list view). They became such a part of the visual vocabulary that
designers started using them elsewhere.

The reason they don't say "More" all the time is the same reason radio
buttons don't say "(mutually exclusive choice)" all the time.
 
> In any case, as far as I've seen, the triangle thingies have no raised border
> and so it doesn't look to me like something I could click anyway.  I suppose
> it has the problem of the 'flat' toolbars.  It looks much nicer, but you lose
> some intuitiveness.

Part of the idea of the disclosure triangle is that most of the time
you won't need to click it. So I think it's actually nice to be more
subtle, in this case.
 
> > On that note, perhaps disclosure triangles should always have a label. :)
> 
> If there would be no label, I would have no clue I would even want to click
> on one.  I think it would be horrible without a label.
> 

If there is a label, it should be specific, though, not just
"More". If it says More, everyone will have to click it just to find
out what is in there, missing the original point. Make sure either the
label or the placement of the triangle make it really clear what will
be disclosed. Even a word like "Details" for extra information is
better than "More".

It's tricky to get things like this right, because you need to balance
clarity against avoiding clutter.

 - Maciej