5 ms·

This should be just Fnurbification [ON|off] or Fnurbification [X] Maybe add some indication which is the default. Bonus points for actual context

by ilyt 4y ago

This should be just Fnurbification [ON|off] or Fnurbification [X] Maybe add some indication which is the default. Bonus points for actual context of the function when you hover over it. Checkbox is fine, toggle switch is also fine as meaning is clear in both cases. Every other solution should lead to whoever responsible for it being fired

4RealFreedom 4y ago
This can lead to additional problems. Say Fnurbification is a setting in code wrapped in an if block. Great, on or off is easy to follow. Now say the Disable Fnurbification is what is actually in code. Now, when someone has a problem with Fnurbification, you have to map state back and see that the inverse was coded for the IU and follow that down the stack. Don't even get me started on defaults. There is no good/easy answer here.
- jefftk 4y ago
  There is an easy answer: "Disable Fnurbification" is not what should be in the code. Present the right interface to the user, and fix the code when practical. Presenting something backwards to the user only makes it harder to fix later.
  - 4RealFreedom 4y ago
    I deal with hundreds of these types of selectors from some inherited code. When a disable changes 2 lines of code to wrap functionality in an if block v adding many scattered if blocks to accommodate the enable case, I'll probably go with the low code solution. If I can easily accommodate enables then sure but it's just not always that easy.
    - jefftk 4y ago
      This is just about what to call the variable. Instead of: if disable_foo: ... I'm recommending: if not enable_foo: ...
- soiler 4y ago
  there is an easy answer if your code isn't written in a way that obfuscates its functionality to the maintainer...
- account42 4y ago
  The way your code is structured should never dictate the user interface. If that is inconvenient, adjust the code not the UI.
jen20 4y ago
This depends on whether the goal is transparency and clarity, or tricking users into enabling yet more “telemetry” surely?
layer8 4y ago
> Fnurbification [X] Actually, that should be: [x] Fnurbification
- j33zusjuice 4y ago
  Why? It feels better on the right, imo. It’s more natural, I see what it is, and then decide at the end to select or deselect. If it’s on the left, I now have to return to the beginning of the word. It’s not very natural.
  - wiradikusuma 4y ago
    I think it looks nicer if you have few elements with varying width: [x] bla [ ] this is a very long label [ ] lorem ipsum
    - layer8 4y ago
      Yes, it’s the same reason why bullet lists have the bullet on the left side.
      - stronglikedan 4y ago
        Even in Saudi Arabia?
        layer8 4y ago
        No, I noted that in the other subthread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34440812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34440812 For RTL languages, everything is simply mirrored though: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/globalization/localizability/mirroring-in-win32#handling-direction-sensitive-graphics https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/globalization/localizabili... It doesn’t change the general argument.
      - chaorace 4y ago
        More broadly, this is a consequence of English being a LTR language. The eye scans from left to right when reading these languages, so one naturally wants to place important visual symbols (bullets, controls, etc.) firstmost where they'll offer maximum contextual impact for the proceeding information. The fixed-width nature of these elements is more of an afterthought that emerges because neat grids make information easier to parse and are generally considered to be visually pleasing. In RTL languages, the movement of the eye is mirrored, so the natural position of these elements also gets mirrored to the right-hand side. Of course, the fixed-width nature does not change because the instinct to craft neat grids exists regardless of directionality. Recently, however, we have begun to see certain touch-based interfaces adopt right-aligned controls specifically, even in LTR configurations. This evolved to compensate for the fact that most people are right-handed and generally cannot reach across the width of a modern touchscreen one-handed. It's effectively a concession to accessibility and is best implemented as a toggleable feature to avoid disadvantaging left-handed users.
dotancohen 4y ago
The problem is that in English "on" and "off" are both adverbs and adjectives. A designer that I once worked with came up with a terrific toggle switch, really the only one that works as well as the simple checkbox in my opinion: https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1318/should-a-toggle-button-show-its-current-state-or-the-state-to-which-it-will-chan/16824#16824 https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1318/should-a-toggle-...
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  But but but but skeumorphism is unfashionable and apple said it wasn't good anymore!!!! You are supposed to design your UI as if it was made in ten minutes by a lazy high schooler making a powerpoint with all the defaults and just bulleted text on a blank background.

by ilyt 4y ago

4RealFreedom 4y ago

This can lead to additional problems. Say Fnurbification is a setting in code wrapped in an if block. Great, on or off is easy to follow. Now say the Disable Fnurbification is what is actually in code. Now, when someone has a problem with Fnurbification, you have to map state back and see that the inverse was coded for the IU and follow that down the stack. Don't even get me started on defaults. There is no good/easy answer here.

jefftk 4y ago
There is an easy answer: "Disable Fnurbification" is not what should be in the code. Present the right interface to the user, and fix the code when practical. Presenting something backwards to the user only makes it harder to fix later.
- 4RealFreedom 4y ago
  I deal with hundreds of these types of selectors from some inherited code. When a disable changes 2 lines of code to wrap functionality in an if block v adding many scattered if blocks to accommodate the enable case, I'll probably go with the low code solution. If I can easily accommodate enables then sure but it's just not always that easy.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    This is just about what to call the variable. Instead of: if disable_foo: ... I'm recommending: if not enable_foo: ...
soiler 4y ago
there is an easy answer if your code isn't written in a way that obfuscates its functionality to the maintainer...
account42 4y ago
The way your code is structured should never dictate the user interface. If that is inconvenient, adjust the code not the UI.

jen20 4y ago

This depends on whether the goal is transparency and clarity, or tricking users into enabling yet more “telemetry” surely?

layer8 4y ago

> Fnurbification [X] Actually, that should be: [x] Fnurbification

j33zusjuice 4y ago
Why? It feels better on the right, imo. It’s more natural, I see what it is, and then decide at the end to select or deselect. If it’s on the left, I now have to return to the beginning of the word. It’s not very natural.
- wiradikusuma 4y ago
  I think it looks nicer if you have few elements with varying width: [x] bla [ ] this is a very long label [ ] lorem ipsum
  - layer8 4y ago
    Yes, it’s the same reason why bullet lists have the bullet on the left side.
    - stronglikedan 4y ago
      Even in Saudi Arabia?
      - layer8 4y ago
        No, I noted that in the other subthread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34440812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34440812 For RTL languages, everything is simply mirrored though: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/globalization/localizability/mirroring-in-win32#handling-direction-sensitive-graphics https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/globalization/localizabili... It doesn’t change the general argument.
    - chaorace 4y ago
      More broadly, this is a consequence of English being a LTR language. The eye scans from left to right when reading these languages, so one naturally wants to place important visual symbols (bullets, controls, etc.) firstmost where they'll offer maximum contextual impact for the proceeding information. The fixed-width nature of these elements is more of an afterthought that emerges because neat grids make information easier to parse and are generally considered to be visually pleasing. In RTL languages, the movement of the eye is mirrored, so the natural position of these elements also gets mirrored to the right-hand side. Of course, the fixed-width nature does not change because the instinct to craft neat grids exists regardless of directionality. Recently, however, we have begun to see certain touch-based interfaces adopt right-aligned controls specifically, even in LTR configurations. This evolved to compensate for the fact that most people are right-handed and generally cannot reach across the width of a modern touchscreen one-handed. It's effectively a concession to accessibility and is best implemented as a toggleable feature to avoid disadvantaging left-handed users.

dotancohen 4y ago

The problem is that in English "on" and "off" are both adverbs and adjectives. A designer that I once worked with came up with a terrific toggle switch, really the only one that works as well as the simple checkbox in my opinion: https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1318/should-a-toggle-button-show-its-current-state-or-the-state-to-which-it-will-chan/16824#16824 https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1318/should-a-toggle-...

mrguyorama 4y ago
But but but but skeumorphism is unfashionable and apple said it wasn't good anymore!!!! You are supposed to design your UI as if it was made in ten minutes by a lazy high schooler making a powerpoint with all the defaults and just bulleted text on a blank background.