[IxDA Discuss] FW: forced choice widgets?

[Rob Adams-Kane]

Perhaps these radio buttons would tell the story, economically:

O   Fold
O   Fold and Spindle
O   Fold, Spindle, Mutilate


Rob Adams-Kane

W.A. Hynes & Company, Inc.
(800) 823-1470 
(707) 586-2222
fax (888) 562-1471
rkane at waHco-it.com
www.waHco-it.com
This email, and any files attached, contains information intended only for the use of the addressee and may include information that is privileged, confidential or exempt from other disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying, printing or other use of this email is prohibited.  If you have received this email in error, please delete it from you computer.  A reply email notifying the sender of the error would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.


-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Lorne Trudeau
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:13 PM
To: Alan Wexelblat; IXDA list
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] forced choice widgets?

Sounds to me like a progress meter would be the way to go. The user chooses from the three options, you then display some visual indication of the data moving left to right, through the various states of existence. The final destination resides at the end.
If an error occurs then it clearly shows them why it is that the data is in its new, modified state.

Lorne

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Alan Wexelblat
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:51 AM
To: IXDA list
Subject: [IxDA Discuss] forced choice widgets?

I have a workflow in which users can choose to move their data through processes, A, B, and C.  Internally the states are actually a sequence.  So if the person selects C we first move the data through A and then B.

I could present this as a radiobutton list, e.g.:
o Fold
o Spindle
o Mutilate

If the person selects Spindle, we secretly fold the data first, etc.
The sequence is hidden.  But
sometimes the processes fail, so a user who selected Mutilate will find that his data Folded properly but couldn't be Spindled.  This person finds himself looking at an error message generated by a process he didn't consciously choose.  Plus his data are now Folded.

Or I could make the sequence explicit by doing something like checkboxes and not allowing the user to choose Spindle until Fold is first checked. But probably 60-75% of users don't really care about the sequence.  They just want their data Mutilated and they object to having to click three times to make what they see as one choice, especially since they make this choice potentially dozens of times during a workday.

Any advice on how to present something like this in the UI?

--
--Alan Wexelblat
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/ List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/ (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
Questions .................. lists at ixda.org Home ....................... http://ixda.org/ Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org ________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/ List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/ (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
Questions .................. lists at ixda.org Home ....................... http://ixda.org/ Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org