We highlight the next logical step and indicate whether some new content
will be created (green) or destroyed (red) as an outcome. Creating and
deleting content, even if these actions can be undone seems worth some
considerations in an environment where content is public and edited
collaboratively by many.
Though this is correct, at times, it is very difficult to put an action
into the bucket of "creating" and "progressing" there are grey areas
here
since we are talking about abstracted concepts and it's difficult to make
it binary. it is possible, but difficult.
That brings me to the users of these concepts. If i am not wrong, there are
three parties involved.
1. Designers
2. Developers
3. Users
For designers, things like progressive and constructive makes sense but a
on semantic level. for independent developers without any design help, the
distinction between constructive and progressive might make things
confusing and complicated. and as far as a I know, users don't perceive
their tasks to be progressive or constructive right way.
Of course, the semantics that were thought before implementing it our
buttons this way made sense at the time and i think it still can be
justified but it seems like there is a fine line between two which makes it
difficult to convey.
If the value coming from having these distinctions is less than the
confusion that we are causing then maybe it's time not have these different
conventions.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Gergo Tisza <gtisza(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Pau Giner
<pginer(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I think the purpose of colour buttons is to set
similar expectations. We
highlight the next logical step and indicate whether some new content will
be created (green) or destroyed (red) as an outcome. Creating and deleting
content, even if these actions can be undone seems worth some
considerations in an environment where content is public and edited
collaboratively by many.
The create/destroy/other split doesn't match the "dangerousness" of the
actions well, though. The typical way for a non-admin user to make a mess
is via page move (which usually cannot be reverted without admin rights)
and merge-type actions (wikidata item merge, or adding an interwiki link on
Wikipedia that causes different concepts to be merged). The most dangerous
actions with admin rights are probably user blocking and page history
merge. None of those are constructive or destructive in the sense the UI
uses those terms.
_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design