[mb-users] RFC: "Edit All" UI mockup

[Age Bosma]

Steve Wyles wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Stefan Kestenholz wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please give feedback to my proposed solution to the usability issues 
>> which
>> were raised concerning the "Edit all" page, which should help to quiet 
>> down
>> the heated debate which has taken place - in this very arena - over 
>> the last
>> few days.
> 

While small, I think it's a big improvement having these icons instead 
of the checkboxes. It removes the need for 'Change' and 'Remove' label.
One small thing, the difference between the two change buttons 
(enabled/disabled) could be a bit bigger.

> Layout wise that is no different, it is just changing the checkboxes for 
> images. It is better, but, the problem where there are two distinct 
> actions in one vertical column still exists. It is still possible to 
> accidently click the wrong one.
> 

Even though it is possible to accidentally click the wrong one you will 
always get a confirmation page when continuing. Clicking the wrong 
button can happen no matter how you position the buttons.

> 
> It is better to use something like:
> 
>  1  2
> [x]
>    [x]
> [x]
>    [x]
> [x]
>    [x]
> 
> People subconsciously go down a single column, moving into two columns 
> makes them think about the functions.
> 

This will make the layout very messy and restless(?). A real clear 
distinction between the two column functions would also require you to 
separate the columns with e.g. a line or colours, which would mess up 
the horizontal track lines again. You could position the change buttons 
underneath the track numbers but this would leave you with the same 'two 
different thing in one colunm' issue again.
I would argue about moving the remove button to the right side of the 
input fields but that would bring the whole lot out of balance I think. 
It wouldn't hurt to give it a try though.

Yours,

Age (Prodoc)


P.s. Am I the only one missing the bottom section, underneath the 
tracks, of that page? ;-)