Re: [Usability] Options, Check, Toggle, Exclusive

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 00:44 +1200, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> On May 16, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Jacob Beauregard wrote:
> >
> > Wow, I like this thread. How about instead of sliding, which seems to 
> > have spread some controversy, the age-old chain-link symbol is used?
> 
> Remember that the same appearance needs to work for horizontal lines of 
> radio buttons, not just vertical lines. For example:
> 
>      Weeks start on: ( ) Sunday  (*) Monday
> 
> So don't get too excited about drawing visual links between the radio 
> buttons. :-)
> 
> It also needs to work for two-dimensional arrays of radio buttons. For 
> example, the four font rendering radio buttons that have a 2*2 layout 
> in the Font Preferences window. (That particular example is crack, but 
> the layout itself is legitimate.)

(I'm only replying to this email because I happened to have
just read it.  I'm really replying to the thread in general.)

So here's a sampling of the points I've seen raised in this thread:

1) Toggle buttons look just like command buttons when they're "off".
2) There's no visual indication of the mutual exclusivity of radio
   buttons.
3) There's no visual indication that labels for radio buttons and
   check buttons are also clickable.

Point (1) is interesting, and I think should be pursued further.
But points (2) and (3) just seem like we're hacking solutions to
problems that don't exist.

I'm using Clearlooks, the default theme in upstream Gnome.  When
I hover over the label of a radio button or check box, the entire
clickable area prelights.  As you mouse your way towards the box,
you'll see the prelight and, hopefully, realize you can click.

As for mutual exlusivity, is there real-world data suggesting that
this is frequently a problem?  Even if users don't immediately grok
the round-means-select-one thing, can't they generally get it from
context?  And if they can't, will connecting the radio buttons with
chains or sliders actually convey that?

There could potentially be cases where there are multiple radio
button groups, and it isn't immediately clear which buttons belong
to which group.  But if that case arises, I'm inclined to say that
the developers just need to fix their interface, putting each group
under a distinct heading.

I don't want to be the luddite, but I worry that we're just adding
visual noise to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

--
Shaun