Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I always have trouble designing the user interface when it come to manage a list of object.
For example, I need to manage a list of employees. At my work, we always switched between two method of managing the employees:
Use a single split screen with the left part being the list of employee, and the right part being the place where you edit the employee. There is usually a toolbar (or ribbon bar) at the top to allow Add/Modify/Remove.
Use a two windows approach: the first one is a full size list with the same toolbar at the top. When someone press a button (or double click an employee), it open a dialog that let you add or modify that employee.
While I prefer the 2nd approach, I don't have any UI expert reference to back my choice or to dismiss it.
Does anybody have any suggestion or references that would help me design a good UI for mananing a list of object?
I don't believe you're going to find any actual studies on this particular issue, since it's so specific to the application at hand. What it comes down to is how the individual objects are used/accessed/modified/etc.
That said, I've gone back and forth over the years on this, and have come to settle on #2. Here's a snag from one of our internal apps.
Power users can get into middle-clicking to open in a new window, and you get sorting, filtering, etc, as the list grows.
Option 1 allows the user to see more list items at a time, so it is preferred when the user is likely to need to jump around a lot in the list (e.g., to find the next record to edit). More items means less scrolling, among other things.
Option 2 can usually get the user to editing the field faster, since there is no waiting for a new browser window to open and no cognitive re-orientation needed by the user, so it is better for heavy data entry (e.g., making a change to every record, one after another).
Both options are substantially inferior to edit-in-place in the table by using an editable grid or replacing your table with an array of appropriate controls (text boxes, combo boxes, checkboxes, etc.) that are populated with the field values for the appropriate set of records. Users change fields directly in the table and select a Save button or menu item to update all changed records at once. Or you can save automatically whenever a field loses focus, if your bandwidth can handle it.
Compared to Options 1 and 2, edit-in-place has the following advantages:
No need to click an Edit button to change a record, an additional navigation step that takes time and learning (e.g., the user has to learn the “edit” icon).
No need to visually re-acquire the fields in another location in order to edit them, making editing faster and easier.
No second window or form layout to learn and understand, and to consume screen real estate that the user may want to use for something else.
No modes –the users can fluidly switch between editing and viewing, and save whenever its convenient.
If you have too many fields for the Employees to show in the table even with horizontal scrolling, then you need to choose between (1) having a split-screen master-detail layout in a single window, and (2) having two windows and allowing drill-down. However, optimizing the display of “extra” fields is a separate issue from how to edit records. The general rule for usability is that if a field can be edited by the user, always make it editable for the user wherever that field appears, whether it be in a table, a detail overflow area of the screen, or a separate drill-down detail window.
Dialogs are modal, and user-experience specialists generally frown on that. A split screen allows not only editing, but also very natural "perusal with all details" of one given employee [or other kind of object] (there may be more info about each than the bare list can usefully show); a button to "make this detailed-info editable" seems a very smooth, natural and seamless approach, without the unpleasantnesses connected with dialogs, popups, "tooltips" appearing on hover, and the like.
For a reference summary of UX criticism of modal operation, you might start at wikipedia and follow their links.
I've used the "email client" layout with some success. The left hand side of the screen contains navigation elements (analogous to folders in an email client); the right hand side is divided into top and bottom in a split window, with the top containing a list (e.g. of employees - analogous to a list of emails) and the bottom containing a form (consisting of tabbed pages) to edit selected items in the list (analogous to a single email which you are composing or viewing). The email client layout has the major benefit of familiarity - almost everyone uses email! And the major email clients all follow the same layout, reinforcing the familiarity benefit.
The right answer depends on whether your list primary objective revolves around editing objects or viewing the list.
If editing is infrequent operation, you can settle for it being in a separate window and use the screen space on the main view to show as much details as needed.
However, if editing is going to be a frequent operation, you want it in place with the list, as opening a new window creates too much of a friction.
Related
I am setting up a database for some coworkers and they asked for something a little different involving forms and split forms. There are three separate people who put info into the database based on location. Due to certain reasons, the forms they use are different by a couple of factors. Those forms are being built to add data to the same table. There is a fourth person who overseas this data from the three forms and assigns priority levels to each row within the table.
The goal was to create a split form so that the fourth person can see all of the data that is being added from the three forms. Click on one of the incidents and add a priority level to each. I have that mostly done the problem is I want to add all of the data fields to the bottom half of the split form without adding more to the top half (the form). As of now I have the boxes I don't need hidden but it doesn't auto-size the form so it just looks long and takes up a ton of space.
By setting the boxes as hidden and resizing them to be smaller it kind of works but not every cell is re-sizable and it won't let me resize the form because of the extra hidden boxes.
This is an image to help visualize what I am asking
As I have understood, you want to hide/show fields corresponding to what type of records fourth person oversees.
I have solved this in form part using Tabs Control, placing different classes of fields on separate tabs. After user selects a definite record, all tabs are set to hidden, except needed.
If you want to hide this in table form appearance... This could be difficult IMHO. Better to split other way, grouping data, adding some more forms and so on.
Introduction
An HTML form contains a checkboxes element listing various indicators. The user may choose exactly three items from that list (see image 1). Upon submitting the form, a bubble chart is created, with one indicator each on the x and y axis and the third indicator defining the size of the bubble (see image 2).
Image 1
Image 2
Problem
By choosing the indicators, the user is not able to define the order of the selected indicators. Thus, the user is not able to define, which indicator is on which axis or which indicator is responsible for the bubble size respectively.
Available solutions
Of course, instead on having a single multi-select checkboxes field in the web form, (1) one could create three single-select radio elements named x, y, and z. Or, if the form is ajax-powered, (2) additional form elements could be shown to let the user choose the respective options.
However, with option (1), the indicators would be repeated thrice in the form and with option (2) the additional form elements would not be inside the list of indicators. Further, I would like to keep the indicators in one element due to the fact that there are other chart options using a very similar form (they are all generated from the same toolbox) and the processing functions are relying on specific element names (not types though).
Questions
I've read about multi-state checkboxes, however, the (only) additional state (indeterminate) is just a visual representation, the checkbox must technically still be either checked or unchecked.
Q1: Is there another (similar) form element which could be used?
From what I read, I would assume, that such an element doesn't exist since what I am practically trying to do, is to send two values (indicator id and chart representation).
Q2: Could someone point me to UI/UX best practices for similar cases?
Due to the lack of correct (search) terms, I haven't quite found good examples of solving this or similar situations. "multi-state checkboxes" bring up the before-mentioned indeterminate state, "ordered checkboxes" mostly refer to some MS Excel problems.
What if I want to have the Biomass for x and z?
UX is a very difficult topic, and denying choices from a user doesn't make them happy at all.
So my solution, not to the technical question, but the UX one, would be to convert all check boxes to radio items and add an additional selection (either as a dropdown or again as radio items) with which you select either x,y or z.
This can easily be achieved via js and solve the problem at hand easily. Another advantage is that you only use controls with which users are already familiar with, which might be an additional plus :)
I am developing a web-based menu application targeted solely for Mobile Safari on the iPad (in other words, I am not at all concerned about cross-browser compatability). I have a form select box which contains a number of options the user can choose from to modify their order, which when clicked displays on the iPad as follows: Screenshot
The problem is that this box is not wide enough to show the user the price or even the full name for several options. Smaller names is not a particularly attractive option in this case. Is there any way in which I can either a.) set the width of this box (doesn't matter if it's a Mobile Safari-specific solution!) or b.) make it so that the box grows wider to accommodate the widest option? I can find nothing on Google that deals with my question save for one forum thread with no useful answers.
Javascript is an option, if necessary.
Thanks!
To the best of my knowledge I believe UIKit entirely with the popup. The only advice I could suggest would be to implement it solely in JavaScript. I've had a quick Google and nothing is coming up that stands out as a existing one.
I need to create a dropdown, which can contain 100s of options.
I need a scrollbar to appear and be consistent across all browsers.
Google came up empty: Is there a good URL that describes if this is consistent or not?
I would strongly recommend against having a scrollable select with 100s of options for usability reasons.
With exception of one corner case, navigating (both searching in, and selecting from) that list is a really really hard and very annoying to the user.
The UI design reasoning is that it requires:
Wide mouse gesture (tiring), followed by immediate precise stop (hard to do because of inertia)
Very difficult to use interface of a scrollbar (extra crap points for scrollbar being in the middle of the page instead of on the right side) - see Jacob Nielsen's and others' usual ranting about difficulties of using scrollbars and general evil of anything too long that requires much scrolling.
Eyes need to scan whole page worth of menu up and down and back, all the time. very tiring.
Here is a set of bad examples
[ the corner case is when all the option names are uniformly distributed across the alphabet (as far as the first letter), which allows somewhat-possible keyboard-only navigation in the drop-down via pressing the first letter of an option ].
A proper UI solution is to have a select whose contents are dynamically populated based on a search field - either typed text (think Google's new search box, or browser's address bar) or sometimes checkboxes/radio buttons.
BTW, sub-menu solutions also suck for mouse navigation - minor twitch of the wrist and you lost all of the pointing work.
I apologize that this answer is not an answer to "how do you solve my technical problem", but I am of a very strong opinin that you're solving the wrong problem in the first place.
HTH.
The short answer is no, for the standard HTML select element and the requirements you describe.
However, do you know you can set the size attribute for how many rows are visible at one time? AFAIK this will force scrolling in all browsers, but it isn't a drop down. Like this:
<select size="10">
<option>etc</option>
...
</select>
There is also the possiblity of optgroup to split the options into categories.
If you have many categories you could do what I did on one site and use this jQuery click menu, using the click function to set a hidden field. So now I have a dropdown with sub-categories and it's quite easy to find the right option.
I'm working on a web application where we have a modal panel/dialog popup to collect user data. The form within the panel has grown large and we've suggested splitting the form across multiple tabs, but our client has suggested adding scrollbars within the modal panel.
Are there usability issues with scrollbars within a modal panel? I believe it's a bad practice but I'd like other opinions.
Thanks,
Glen
Update:
I'll explain the scenario in more detail. We have a search page where search result items can be saved (copied into a another area of the system). Additional information can be saved with this items (e.g. additional comments, assignment to other buckets - I can't get into any more detail than that). When a user wants to save a search result item, they can check one or more items and click a save button - that's when our modal panel popups.
Originally, the users were taken to a separate page and they followed a series of pages. Our clients felt this was time consuming, so we changed the page to use a modal panel.
I'm not 100% sure using a modal panel is the best design, but that's what we have now. I welcome any other ideas.
Well, I gotta ask, if you have a modal form that's so long, shouldn't it be made into its own page?
I mean, the whole point of modal dialogues is to tell the user something he needs to know (which are usually disregarded and are annoying) or to get some information from the user that is necessary before proceeding.
You say your form is for gathering user input. If it's something the user must enter before proceeding (as in a part of a checkout flow or something like that), then I would say it's probably best to dedicate an entire page to the flow.
If it's something that's more of a "log in here before proceeding with what you're doing" kind of thing, again, I think it would make more sense for it to be its own page that brings you back to the page you were on before you entered it once you're done filling out the form. That's how the Stack Overflow human-verification page works.
If it's something annoying like "give us your feedback about the site", then it shouldn't be modal at all but rather an easily-dismissed (dare I say it?) pop-up window.
Modal dialogues really should be kept as brief as possible. If brevity is impossible, and the dialogue really must be modal, then I think it would make more sense to create a flow of pages that must be filled in before the next one can be accessed. Like a checkout: you need to add products to a cart before adding shipping information, and you need shipping information before you can determine the cost of the shipment. That kind of thing.
But without knowing the exact nature of your modal dialogue I can't tell you exactly which way would be best.
EDIT: Aha! Your clients felt this was time consuming, eh? This is the type of situation where you should do a very quick and dirty live usability test to see which way is actually better. Grab some people from down the hall, show some of them the modal way (with scrolling) of doing it and show others the old (non-modal) way of doing it and see what they have to say.
(Ideally you are recording the session and the screen, and you make sure to not let your own personal preferences show through. Just ask them to use the system while you watch to see how well they perform the task. Use the recording to time both methods to see if one way really is faster than the other.)
You shouldn't ever make a usability decision that goes against the norm (the norm in this case being "large forms merit their own pages") without making sure that it actually is more usable the abnormal way. When it comes to usability, the norm is usually the norm because it's usable (but not always, which is why you must test). If the client fights back, you'll at least have evidence that they're going against hard empirical evidence that what they want is silly.
Ultimately, though, the clients are the ones paying the bills. If you can't get them to see reason then you'll have to make the most of what they tell you. If the form must be in a modal dialogue, then you can at least try to hide non-essential fields under the fold (if there are non-essential fields) so that the majority of users will never have to scroll.
Make sure the buttons to submit the form (or whatever it is that you need to do with the form) are visible no matter where the user has scrolled. A really bad idea would be to put all the required fields at the top and then force the user to scroll down anyway to hit the submit button. That's just rude.
It seems to make sense to put a modal window here--I assume you're doing it as a layer on the page. But what it sounds like is that it's getting crowded, and you're looking at ways to manage the ever-increasing array of UI elements.
To answer your initial question about scrollbars, no, they are not verboten. However, as another responded asserted, you should never design action UI elements within the scrolling area.
It sounds as if some good user research could be useful here. What items are important to users. Which items are required and which are optional? Can they be categorized?
Some people suggest that tabs are useful for categorization when the number of UI items overflows a dialog box. In this case, though, I think this would be a bad idea. This isn't a setting category of dialog box, but more of a confirmation/selection/entry dialog where users will save whatever is entered and chosen. There's a good chance with tabs that users would miss the tabs and miss entering information. And if something on a "back" tab is required and a user doesn't go there, then you have a really poor error experience.
One of the things about scrolling is that it is easy for users with mice. they have the option of either clicking on the scrollbar or (for many) rolling a scroll wheel.
One thing you may not have considered, especially if some things that users can enter or choose are optional, is to create sections within the dialog box that can be collapsed and expanded. Sections with required elements would be expanded by default and sections with optional elements would be collapsed by default. If expansion of a section adds a scrollbar, that addition to the UI is obvious to users.
Of course, you may have to figure out how all this would work for people who have only keyboards, who have disabilities, and who might be accessing this on a mobile device.
I don’t think a tabbed panel is fundamentally better or worse than a scrolling panel. Each has advantages in different situations. However more important in your case is this: If you need tabs or scrolling then your panel is probably too complex to be modal. The more information input in a modal panel, the more likely a user will need to go somewhere else to get an answer, and the more work you throw away if the user decides they must go somewhere else for any reason.
The solution is to move as much information as you can out of the panel and onto the parent page/window. Let users enter the “additional information” right onto the search results page, allowing them to explore the results to help them decide on the information. Since the additional information apparently consumes a lot of space, make its controls show-able and hide-able, but always preserve user inputs between hides and shows. I think it’s okay to either tabs or scrolling to keep the footprint small. Additional information about a single search result should go in controls next to that search result, rather than in a separate panel.
The modal Save panel should only include a few controls that are instrumental to saving, such as the filename and location, and maybe the file type. If all the information is instrumental to saving, then make the save panel modeless. Who says you can’t?
Putting all the save information on another page is not much better than a modal panel, since that is also effectively modal, in the sense that the users can’t go somewhere else without losing their input. Even if you take steps to preserve users’ inputs to the page if they go to another page, most web-abused users will think they might lose their input, so they won’t try.