5 ms·

I don't really understand why this interaction model is a good thing. The inline and popup versions require me to confirm every single action. It's forcing me t

by rhplus 14y ago

I don't really understand why this interaction model is a good thing. The inline and popup versions require me to confirm every single action. It's forcing me to perform two actions (select, confirm) when a regular form uses just one (select).

mcgwiz 14y ago
Agreed. To get around this but keep the per-field editability, a toggle to make all fields editable should be available, as well as expose an atomic aggregate save trigger.
glomph 14y ago
In some specific cases it is the preferred system. For example editing a comment.
ya3r 14y ago
I think in a common Content Management System (CMS) while editing content this is a very good interaction model. In that case you have bunch of fields but you only need to edit one or two.
crucialfelix 14y ago
I use it for cases where the public display page can have some displayed fields that an admin can — if they notice a little typo or something to change - quickly click and fix it. But not for doing editing where you need to change many or most of the fields.
lowboy 14y ago
I can see this being used most effectively as an enhancement in a display/view context rather than replacing traditional forms. Take the example of a table of employee information where you have the standard edit/delete/view buttons on each row and you notice a typo in one row. To me it's a better user flow to just edit that one field inline than have to pull up the whole form through a modal or page load. Both for speed (in the case of the page load) and forcing the user to re-locate the field they wanted to change.
flipchart 14y ago
What gets me is that it breaks quick editing by tabbing between the fields. I now have to keep switching back to my mouse to get to the next field. (Yes I could navigate the links with the keyboard, but it is a lot more work).

5 ms·

I don't really understand why this interaction model is a good thing. The inline and popup versions require me to confirm every single action. It's forcing me t

by rhplus 14y ago

mcgwiz 14y ago
Agreed. To get around this but keep the per-field editability, a toggle to make all fields editable should be available, as well as expose an atomic aggregate save trigger.
glomph 14y ago
In some specific cases it is the preferred system. For example editing a comment.
ya3r 14y ago
I think in a common Content Management System (CMS) while editing content this is a very good interaction model. In that case you have bunch of fields but you only need to edit one or two.
crucialfelix 14y ago
I use it for cases where the public display page can have some displayed fields that an admin can — if they notice a little typo or something to change - quickly click and fix it. But not for doing editing where you need to change many or most of the fields.
lowboy 14y ago
I can see this being used most effectively as an enhancement in a display/view context rather than replacing traditional forms. Take the example of a table of employee information where you have the standard edit/delete/view buttons on each row and you notice a typo in one row. To me it's a better user flow to just edit that one field inline than have to pull up the whole form through a modal or page load. Both for speed (in the case of the page load) and forcing the user to re-locate the field they wanted to change.
flipchart 14y ago
What gets me is that it breaks quick editing by tabbing between the fields. I now have to keep switching back to my mouse to get to the next field. (Yes I could navigate the links with the keyboard, but it is a lot more work).