Re: [Usability] Re: close icon is misleading
- From: "Seth Nickell" <seth gnome org>
- To: "Maxwell Terpstra" <terpstra myrealbox com>, usability gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Usability] Re: close icon is misleading
- Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 18:12:30 -0700
"non standard" buttons are typically better because they tell the user
what action will be performed. Use of descriptive buttons rather than
stock "ok", "cancel", "yes" and "no" buttons is highly recommended.
Stock buttons force people to read and analyze the dialog's text more
carefully, and when they won't mistakes are likely. Its slower and more
error prone.
-Seth
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:48PM -0800, Maxwell Terpstra wrote:
--From: Calum Benson <Calum Benson Sun COM>
The main issue right now is that there are loads of
buttons in dialogs that don't have icons ...
IIRC it's also a bit of extra effort to make the
icons on 'custom' buttons themable
Why are those so many different buttons in the first place? Why are
custom buttons even allowed? It seems to me, there should be a
standard set of buttons that do standard things, and if you want to do
something else, you shouldn't use a button (for example, to chose how
to handle a cookie, show a radio list of options, plus a standard "ok"
button).
By making a limited set of standardized buttons, you're not only
solving the problem of unknown buttons without an icon, but, in my
view, providing a more consistant interface which is easier to use.
Can anyone give me an example of a situation that NEEDS to have a
non-standard button? And if the cases are so few, couldn't these uses
be standardized as well?
--From: Dan Zlotnikov <dzlotnik perpugilliam csclub uwaterloo ca>
That advantage [of using icons] breaks down
spectacularly when inappropriate icons are selected
which is why it should be a concern of the HIG..
... or a complex concept must be presented. Care to
come up with an icon for "create new template"?
Most of the time, complex actions like this are not handled by a
dialogue, but rather by a command structure in the program itself (ie.
your example does not really apply, because - taking MS Word as an
example - it would be an option in the "File" menu of the program). In
all other cases of which I am aware, the complex action can and should
be split into simplier components, which in the end include a simple,
standardized button.
the problem of finding an appropriate icon, one that
will be appropriate to *all* levels of technical
expertise, as well as *all* cultures and social
context is far from trivial
You're absolutely right. It's something that will take a lot of time
and consideration to put together, but I think it's well worth the
effort.
--From: Rodney Dawes <dobey free fr>
Perhaps images should be "translated" also. Then we
would have different versions of images, for
different languages, and the proper metaphors and
contexts could be used
..and with a standard button set this would be trivial to do via
theming.
--Maxwell Terpstra
_______________________________________________
Usability mailing list
Usability gnome org
http://lists.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
-Seth
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]