4 ms·
Sure, it would have to be thoughtful, careful, context-dependent and possibly optional (e.g. a "Details" toggle or something). But it would still be so much mo
by partdavid 4y ago
Sure, it would have to be thoughtful, careful, context-dependent and possibly optional (e.g. a "Details" toggle or something).
But it would still be so much more useful to see "Do you want to navigate away? (580 characters of Description and two other fields will be lost)". Or "Do you want to quit? (0:28 mins of play will be lost)" versus just quitting when nothing will be lost because the auto-save is up to date.
Just warning that something may or may not be destructive and leaving it up to me to guess how things work feels lazy to me, as a user. As a developer, I understand it entirely!
And it would help avoid warning fatigue because the warning only appears when something actually is going to be lost--and then you can decide whether to keep it or not.
- account42 4y ago> But it would still be so much more useful to see "Do you want to navigate away? (580 characters of Description and two other fields will be lost)". Or "Do you want to quit? (0:28 mins of play will be lost)" versus just quitting when nothing will be lost because the auto-save is up to date. For games, you could perhaps even omit the warning entirely if you just saved manually.
- partdavid 4y agoRight--that's the heart of what I'm thinking. If there really isn't unsaved work or unsaved progress or whatever... don't warn me at all. That will also solve the habituation problem of always dismissing warnings--because when a warning appears, I'll know it's substantive.