[KDE Usability] Re: Usability Questions for KDE Telepathy

Thu Feb 3 11:16:13 CET 2011

Both ideas seems good - making it look disabled (including the icon) and
adding the status text too as there is plenty of space between the account
name and presence icon. The font could be in italics maybe? So it looks like
a note...

Marty
On Feb 2, 2011 12:55 AM, "David Edmundson" <david at davidedmundson.co.uk>
wrote:
> I had an alternate plan.
> In the status text it says why you're not online. "Network Error", "Wrong
> password etc.", I was thinking of making this say "Account Disabled".
>
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Thomas Richard <thomas9999 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> I think a tooltip would definitely be a good idea.
>> It might also help to make the text a little grayish when an account is
>> disabled. This would make it immediately obvious what the checkbox does
>> when a
>> user decides to click it.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Thomas
>>
>> On Tuesday 01 February 2011 17:20:07 Martin Klapetek wrote:
>> > I'd still like to point out the issue with checkboxes next to the
>> accounts
>> > in the accounts list (see background in screenshot [1]). There is no
>> > indication, what are these for (I assume they're for enabling/disabling
>> > that account, but average user might not and can get easily confused),
so
>> > I'd add some kind of information to them, column header might be great,
>> > but it would have to be the whole row and that wouldn't look too good
>> > IMHO. So probably a tooltip explaining what is it for. Another option
is
>> > to add a text right next to them, but this would introduce more UI
>> > clutter.
>> >
>> > So the tooltip seems to be the best solution. What do you think?
>> >
>> > Marty
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>>
http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/sel
>> > ect_protocol.png
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/2/1 David Edmundson <david at davidedmundson.co.uk>
>> >
>> > > Here is our reply from the usability guys.
>> > >
>> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > > From: Aurélien Gâteau <agateau at kde.org>
>> > > Date: 2011/1/29
>> > > Subject: [KDE Usability] Re: Usability Questions for KDE Telepathy
>> > > To: kde-usability at kde.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I finally took the time to look at your message and screenshots.
Thanks
>> > > for taking the time to produce detailed screenshots. See my comments
>> > > below. [snip]
>> > >
>> > > > We have a wizard for setting up new accounts.
>> > > > [1]
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/s
>> > > elect_protocol.png
>> > >
>> > > > The second page on here allows us to set up everything you need to
>> set
>> > > > up everything 90% of users will need to configure to set up an
>> account
>> > > > (username/password normally). This changes per protocol.
>> > > > [2]
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/c
>> > > onfigure_jabber.png
>> > >
>> > > > From here I made a decision that all advanced settings (that most
>> > > > people won't need to change (server addresses, ports, security,
etc.
>> )
>> > > > should be
>> > >
>> > > an
>> > >
>> > > > entire page away to 'hide' them from the majority of users who
won't
>> > >
>> > > care.
>> > >
>> > > > [3]
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/c
>> > > onfigure_jabber_advanced.png
>> > >
>> > > > Some protocols have several tabs of advanced options, others (such
as
>> > > > Facebook or IRC) have none, and as such have no "advanced button as
>> > > > seen
>> > >
>> > > in
>> > >
>> > > > screenshot 2.
>> > > >
>> > > > Issues:
>> > > > * Is the 'overuse' of dialogs ok? If not what is a good solution?
>> > >
>> > > The only problematic dialog here IMO is the "Advanced" dialog. Is it
>> > > possible to move its content either as an "Advanced" tab or to place
it
>> > > below the "Advanced" button, but keep it hidden until the user clicks
>> > > this button?
>> > >
>> > > > * How can we solve the 'large whitespace' issue seen in screenshot
>> 2?
>> > >
>> > > Do you have code which ensures the content of the list in screenshot
1
>> > > is fully visible? That would explain why the wizard dialog is so
tall.
>> > >
>> > > > ---
>> > > >
>> > > > We're also looking at, and not sure on a good way to do input
>> > > > validation.
>> > > >
>> > > > There are two ways we're currently providing (or wanting to
provide)
>> > > > feedback on the validation state. We've developed a custom widget
>> which
>> > > > shows a star on the right when a field is required and the user
>> hasn't
>> > >
>> > > typed
>> > >
>> > > > anything in the field. When the user starts typing, the star
becomes
>> a
>> > >
>> > > red
>> > >
>> > > > cross. This indicates that the provided value is not valid. When
the
>> > >
>> > > value
>> > >
>> > > > gets valid, the red cross turns into a green check mark.
>> > > >
>> > > > The second widget to provide feedback to the user would be a
red-isch
>> > >
>> > > error
>> > >
>> > > > message on top. The idea is (stolen) borrowed from the bluedevil
>> > > > configuration dialog. They have the same box on top. This box would
>> > >
>> > > appear
>> > >
>> > > > if a user clicks OK and not every value is valid, or somethings
else
>> > > > goes wrong. With a meaningful error message that is of course.
>> > > > Look at the screenshots validation1.png and validation2.png
attached
>> to
>> > > > actually see the widgets. I know the placement of the validated
line
>> > > > edit
>> > >
>> > > is
>> > >
>> > > > not OK. It's just there to test. Of course, the text in the
feedback
>> > >
>> > > widget
>> > >
>> > > > should say something meaningful instead of Creation failed.. We
would
>> > >
>> > > like
>> > >
>> > > > to know if we are on the right track though, before we start
>> > > > integrating these widgets.
>> > > >
>> > > > [4]
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/v
>> > > alidation1.png
>> > >
>> > > > [5]
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://static.davidedmundson.co.uk/accounts-kcm-pics/usability_review_1/v
>> > > alidation2.png
>> > >
>> > > > The question we would like to ask about validation:
>> > > > * Should we even give the user the opportunity to click the OK
button
>> > > > if
>> > >
>> > > not
>> > >
>> > > > all required values are valid, or should it be grayed out?
>> > >
>> > > Both approaches are valid. As long as the "field validity" indicators
>> > > make it obvious that something is missing, I would personally go for
>> > > graying out the OK button.
>> > >
>> > > > * Is it common to show the icons of the validation state on the
>> right,
>> > > > inside the line-edit?
>> > > >
>> > > > * Is there any way to improve all of this? We're not really sure
>> about
>> > >
>> > > all
>> > >
>> > > > of this
>> > >
>> > > Using a star to denote a mandatory field is a common UI pattern on
the
>> > > Web. I think it is a good idea to use it here, but I have two
concerns:
>> > >
>> > > - If the star becomes a red cross as soon as the user starts typing,
I
>> > > am afraid the user will interpret this change as an indication that
he
>> > > just made a mistake. I suggest always showing a red star (not the
>> cross,
>> > > because it is associated with "error", not with "mandatory") when the
>> > > field is empty or wrong and turn it into the green check mark when
the
>> > > field is OK.
>> > >
>> > > - The icon looks a bit big inside the line edit. It would probably be
>> > > nicer to show the widget on the right of the line edit.
>> > >
>> > > Your work looks promising, looking forward for it!
>> > >
>> > > Aurélien
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > kde-usability mailing list
>> > > kde-usability at kde.org
>> > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > KDE-Telepathy mailing list
>> > > KDE-Telepathy at kde.org
>> > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy
>> _______________________________________________
>> KDE-Telepathy mailing list
>> KDE-Telepathy at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-telepathy/attachments/20110203/323321c0/attachment-0001.htm 