I'm implementing Drag & Drop for an application of mine so a user can drag some item to a folder. Regardless of the programming language/Gui Framework I used I never liked implementing Drag & Drop code at all.
Further I often see computer users who don't use Drag & Drop if you don't tell them exactly how it works. They are searchig for an "Add"-Button instead of just dragging the item to the folder for instance (I have seen this in iTunes several times).
So I ask myself if there isn't a better alternative to the Drag & Drop paradigm. You could for instance blend in context sensitive buttons near every item when a folder is highlighted. The button-click would then add the item. Usability-wise not the best example but maybe you know better ones.
Do you know nice alternatives, applications that implement this "item-to-folder-functionality" without resorting to Drag & Drop?
It makes me think of the 'Move to' function in GMail. You select the messages your want to move with the checkboxes. On top, there is a dropdown button (with autocomplete support to easily locate the label you want) that allows you to move the messages to the label/folder. No drag and drop and intuative indeed.
(That said, I find DnD very natural, I definitely would consider it if building a GUI)
Related
I'm working on redesigning a web interface to provide the same functionality it has currently but with easier use via good UX design. Currently, here is what the design looks like:
I'm less worried about the tofu look and feel, that can come later, I want to nail the UX functionality first. The idea here in this tab is the user can select the items via a checkbox and perform the actions in the "I Want To" drop down (which opens different modal dialogs depending on the action). The 3 dot ellipsis on the right of the items in the list allow the user to perform the same actions via another drop down control, with the idea that they use the top drop down to perform the actions on multiple items, the ellipsis three dot menu for one item.
The obnoxious part of this control is that the list could contain hundreds of items, and the check box takes too much precision to check quickly. The user would select which items they would like to perform the actions on sequentially, then have to scroll up to the top of the page to select the action. This could be 5 seconds of scrolling, which I find obnoxious. I want to develop a good UX pattern to provide the same functionality in less clicks, scrolling, and frustration.
My inital idea was to provide a floating action button. The user could then * somehow * (I haven't thought of an idea yet, at minimum at least a bigger check box) select multiple items then pick what they want to do via the floating action button which is always within the bounds of the screen instead of the horrible scroll back to the top (I don't think a "scroll to top" button is a good solution for this either).
So I need some recommendations on a UX pattern or some general suggestions on how to make this process less frustrating for users. I'm a fan of material design right now, but I'm open to any suggestions, material design guides don't seem to have any paradigms for something like this.
I think the UX steps are in a good track: first select them, then set the action.
Instead of it being only a checkbox to click, the whole top part of each line could be clickable to select the item. This would make it much easier for the user, and less frustrating not being able to hit the checkbox.
Fixing the header on top would be usefull for adding a "Select/Unselect all" option and having the actions always available. Adding a searchbox to filter could be as well a good option if you are thinking of long lists. Combining the search box and the "Select all" option should help the user in their tasks.
If that is the most important action to be done in that screen, making the "What to do" button stand out a bit more would be a good idea to differenciate the primary from the secondary options for the user to do.
I see two simple things you can do to make this more usable with very little effort.
Remove the checkbox and make the entire row tappable, highlighting those selected. Each row would essentially become the checkbox's label, and the checkbox itself would be hidden from view.
Fix the header to the top of the browser window when the user scrolls down.
I need to implement a threaded view of sorts in an old VB6 app. It should look similar to this:
So, it's like a TreeView of sorts but there are buttons on the right (for each row) that could be pressed. The view does not need to collapse - it always stays in the expanded mode. The users should be able to respond to each node (via the comment button on the far right). And, of course, users should be able to scroll through the entries.
What are some of the ways I could implement this? I am open to 3rd party controls, paid or not.
VSFlexGrid has an outline mode. You can set the indent per row via the RowOutlineLevel property. It supports word wrap, images, etc within its cells/columns so you should be able to get pretty close to what you want. It also supports owner-drawn which lets you fully customize the cell painting (for example, to get those rounded corners).
I'm sure there are other controls out there as well...
I'm trying to have a feature to allow users choose two different methods of cost calculation: either they can enter a yearly cost breakdown on a datasheet (2010: $10,000, 2011: $12,000, etc) or they can enter a flat yearly cost multiplied by the number of years they select.
If I were developing another kind of web application, I'd have radio buttons to select two different options. One option would display the datasheet, and the other option would display two text fields to enter values into. However, I understand that you can't have radio buttons in Access 2010 web databases. Also, is it possible to make elements appear and disappear based on a combo box selection?
If not, perhaps I could have two different combo box options: "enter yearly cost breakdown"
or "enter flat yearly cost," which open the correct respective forms as pop-ups.
So, 1) can I have Ajax-like appearing and disappearing elements as triggered by a combo box (or ideally, radio buttons), and 2) if not, can anyone think of another clever way of doing it?
Sure, you get a nice effect by using a tab control. You can place controls and even a sub form on that tab control.
So, you build a screen like this:
Then, simple set the visible property of the second tab = No. This will hide the tab (don't change this until you built the page since it will hide it! (use property sheet to hide/un-hide during development).
Now, add some code to the after update event of the list box. Like this:
In the above, I have named the tabs PYear and PFlat.
The result is this (this is a animated gif I inserted):
Of course, you really probably could just dump the whole "list box" selection, and use a screen like this with the tabs (tabs are good UI, and users tend to grasp them quick):
So, you can hide a "set" of controls, and it really far less work and hassle then writing a bunch of JaveScript anyway. As noted, the "set" of controls you drop into each of the tabs can be sub forms, and also that of continues forms. So, the "hiding" as a set does work well in this case. I did have some format issues and found that I had to "start out" with the 2nd tab dispaled first (the first one being hidden). As noted, the listbox selecting is nice, but one could likly just go with using tabs in the first place.
I have a dialog that includes file selection and it has a "Browse..." button. But it seems like it would be a good idea to provide some kind of drop target so that the user can use his/her favorite file browser to select a file (or files) and drag it onto my application.
Is there any standard practice for what to use as a drop target?
Is it a file icon of some sort? what would that look like?
I tend to think that drop targets should be where the file "should land". That is, if I had a browse button and file path editbox, I'd make the path box the target. If I made a document editing application, I'd make the entire editing area the drop target (unless that would make an embedded object of course ... :-P who said these things are easy?)
So I'd say it depends on the application. But having a dedicated, separate target with no other purpose than to drop things on may not be the best solution, since it unneccessarily clutters the interface even for people who will never be interested in using the feature.
In Safari (on the Mac, at least), a file-chooser form element (Consisting of a "Choose..." button and a field showing the chosen file's name) is also a drag-and-drop target. (Contrast with Firefox, which treats the whole window as a drag-and-drop target, and will replace the current page with the dropped item.)
Other places, I've seen an inset box, sometimes with a centered, grayed-out "Drag items here" text which disappears if anything is dragged in.
As Ruddy said, I don't recall any standard icon for the drop idea. There is one for the no drop as shown in this image
(source: west-wind.com)
Otherwise I tend to like this kind of drop explanation; I find them pretty explicit.
Usually if a window accepts files for drag'n'drop - it just accepts them anywhere in the window.
If you have a list of files (listbox/view) or an just an text box that accepts a single file, those individual control windows could be the drop target rather than the entire window.
Normally there is no visual indication that a window accepts file drops. The only indication would be that you try it and you don't get the no-drop cursor when you drag across the window.
(Note: this is under MS Windows, other os window systems may have different standards)
I am thinking of implementing a ribbon GUI in one of my apps and of course want to adhere to the MS Guidelines so it feels like a normal ribbon, etc. But I'm trying to figure out how to solve a specific problem in dynamically changing the ribbon.
I'm creating a concept game editor, please no question on why a ribbon as this is purely a concept idea, but the application will have many editors (2D, 3D, Code, etc) and for each one the GUI should adapt and display relevant controls i.e. in the 2D editor maybe a paintbrush, on the 3D many pan and rotate tools.
Given the ribbon guidelines it makes sense to the Home menu to contain the most common tools, but only for the type of object being edited (rotate makes no sense for 2D or Code!).
I initially thought it could have one window per editor but this makes a real mess and I'd rather have lots of tabbed editors so you can flick through them fast like in eclipse etc. Also all editors save back into one file so it makes sense to have one application window to keep this metaphor for the user.
I was thinking I could dynamically change the ribbon tabs depending on what type of editor the user had open (tabs may appear/disappear, content on the Home tab etc would change) but then this breaks the MS guidelines of:
"Controls displayed in a group MUST NOT change as a result of selection. If a control is not active, then the control MUST be grayed out, rather than removed from the group"
"The tab selected on the Ribbon MUST NOT automatically switch as a result of user selections made in the 177 document (except as noted in the Contextual Tabs section)."
I understand the reasoning behind the guidelines but im not really sure how to get the ribbon to feel right in this situation:
Change the content of the tabs
depending on editor type (goes
against the guidelines)
Have a tab
per editor type (but what if i end up
with 15 editor types!)
Have a very
generic ribbon and move specific
editor operations to a side bar or
something (not the best GUI design)
Use contextual tabs for each type of
editor (better solution but means you
always have one contextual tab open!)
Any other ideas/solutions would be greatly appreciated as I must use a ribbon and must use it for this type of application!
If you are providing a tab that is editor-specific, I suppose you could lay it out in the way that is best for that particular editor. That means that controls are going to move around occasionally, if you use the same tab for the other editors. It doesn't seem practical to gray out the controls that don't apply to any particular editor, if it's going to cause a lot of clutter.
On the other hand, graying out controls does have the benefit of keeping each control in exactly the same physical place on the tab. Do not underestimate the power of this. There's nothing more aggravating than expecting a control one place, and having it suddenly move someplace else (or disappear altogether). The graying out is a clear indication that the grayed control does not apply in this context.
So depending on how different the controls are for each editor, you will have to decide which approach is less disruptive: to gray out the unneeded controls, or to provide a fresh layout for each editor.
It doesn't seem workable to open a tab for every editor that's open, since there will be many tabs that are useless when the user is in a specific editor.
If possible, enlist the help of some volunteers or beta testers, and do some paper prototyping with them to see which approach resonates better with them.
I'm facing the same design problem. One idea is to use different frame for each editor and a different specialized ribbon in it. Because there's little point in a big ribbon with 10 tabs full of disabled commands.
P.S. I'm investigating another idea - to use certain tabs clicks for triggering different editor modes. (I'm designing a house drafting program.) In example:
Clicking "Home" tab switches to the
plan editor to the edit the house
from "top" view;
Clicking "Wall"
tab switches to the wall editor
where you can edit the wall shape
and featues.
Clicking on other tabs
may not change the current editor.
They can show up other non-modal
commands that are related to the
whole document (or something else),
not about the current editor mode
itself.