3 ms·
It also would mean you would move the item eagerly, then put it back on error. Or alternatively make it a "ghost" item in the list then remove on success. But o
by JamesSwift 2y ago
It also would mean you would move the item eagerly, then put it back on error. Or alternatively make it a "ghost" item in the list then remove on success. But overall the eager-move + toast + undo is just a much faster feeling implementation and the overall UX is so much cleaner.
- notpushkin 2y agoThe undo button justifies the toast here IMO. Otherwise I'd prefer ghosting really. For the checkboxes, I'd say GitHub nailed it: for settings that are applied instantly (e. g. https://github.com/settings/appearance https://github.com/settings/appearance), they show a spinner and then a single checkmark right across the section title. (It used to be next to the input element – both ways are fine, I think)
- JamesSwift 2y agoI agree they do a good job, but I think a toast without undo could also work there. Apply the UI eagerly, toast success or failure. As it is, I assume on failure it becomes an 'X' and shows an error? I just dont generally like very short transitions like the spinner is currently. In general, coming from app land, I prefer a deferred loading spinner that only shows if the action takes X ms. So in the happy path of a fast action the user never sees the loading state.