3 ms·
It's non-intuitive that you have to press enter to activate the timer. I couldn't work out why making the text box lose focus didn't start it. I ended up having
by kintamanimatt 14y ago
It's non-intuitive that you have to press enter to activate the timer. I couldn't work out why making the text box lose focus didn't start it. I ended up having to read the source to figure it out!
Also, it'd be good if there would be a way to start a new task after clicking "I give up"!
Funny idea for a pomodoro timer!
- gnus 14y agoLOL. We intentionally wanted to make the user feel like he/she is hopeless if he/she were to press "I give up" - ending it with a middle finger. Game over.
- kintamanimatt 14y agoI like you!
- hluska 14y agoSeconded!
- Mahn 14y ago> It's non-intuitive that you have to press enter to activate the timer. It felt pretty natural to me. We've been entering text in a box and pressing enter after we are done for decades.
- kintamanimatt 14y agoThis is very true, but only if it's obvious that some data is supposed to be sent to the server, e.g. a search box. In my mind this pattern didn't apply because it was clear something was supposed to happen on the client, not the server, i.e. activate the timer. I presumed that causing the text box to lose focus would activate it. I know I'm wrong, I just described my dozy error caused by what I perceived to be an anti-pattern.