« Return to Thread: usability of tab focus
Re: usability of tab focus
by Oleh Kovalchuke
::
Rate this Message:
[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>> 2. It makes the form unpredictable, as they would not know what next tab
>> index would do
>True, but that is a problem that could be fixed easily with visual aids.
Yes, but you will also unnessesarily increase mental load of filling your
form: instead of mindlessly pressing tab twice to skip a field, users will
have to associate the meaning of field highlight with tab order any time
they see the form. Needless to say, this new behavior would be conditioned
by your software only, would go against common experience. Better highlight
the frequently used, "expert" fields and preserve complete tabbing sequence.
Also consider those infrequent occasions when the seldom fields do need to
be filled. We have good memory of rhythm and tabbing blends effortlessly
with keyboard typing. Whenever the user would have to use "infrequent"
fields they would fairly effortlessly change the rhythm from for
example 1-1-3-1-2 to 1-1-1-1-1-2. Consider the alternative:
1-1-mouse-click-keyboard-mouse-click-keyboard-tab-1-2 - do it once every
hour and you'll quickly realiize that you are working too hard (could be
viable option if you have to do it only once a day).
I liked Jack's suggestion of customization initially, but then realized that
it wouldn't work since the fields need to be used from time to time. For the
same reason "show-hide options" interface could become annoying very quickly
if user need to show-n-hide frequently enough.
And so once more the appropriatness of solution will depend on answer to the
simple time question: "How infrequent is seldom?" (hard to get away from the
time aspect in interaction design).
--
Oleh Kovalchuke
Interaction Design is Design of Time
http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm
On 6/18/06, Simon Asselbergs <interaction-designer@...> wrote:
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
> > >> Should all fields using tabfocus events, or only the most used input
> > pattern? What is the best practice?
> >
> > Have Tab index for all fields, for following reasons:
> >
> > 1. The users who use tab are going to ofcourse rely on keyboards , hence
> > having tab index for selected fields would require them to change input
> > devices in case any other field has ot be selected, this breaks flow.
> You
> > can take this oportuity to rationalize the form and may be remove fields
> > that are there for wrong reasons
>
> It is not that the users rely only on keyboard, they also have a mouse. I
> can't narrow down the number of fields in this case. There are also fields
> that edit a table, such as Male, Female, Unknown. This will almost never
> need to be editted. But these must be present on the form. If you have all
> fields tabindexed, it becomes 26 [Tab]-key clicks.
>
> The user where the application is targeted at is not a consumer, but an
> employee. They have to be able to have fast input times for their most
> regular input patterns. So I thought if reducing the number of fields is not
> an option, than excluding seldom used fields fomr the tab focus is.
>
>
> > 2. It makes the form unpredictable, as they would not know what next tab
> > index would do
>
> True, but that is a problem that could be fixed easily with visual aids.
>
>
> > 3. Non-sighted users cannot use pointing device like mouse, but rely on
> > devices like keyboard,they would have no way to access other form
> fields.
>
> The application already doesn't take care of Non-sighted users. They
> aren't included in our target group.
>
> Has anyone have experience with the same kind of situation?
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
>
> Search for businesses by name, location, or phone number. -Lycos Yellow
> Pages
>
>
> http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss@...
> 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@...
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss@...
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@...
Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>> 2. It makes the form unpredictable, as they would not know what next tab
>> index would do
>True, but that is a problem that could be fixed easily with visual aids.
Yes, but you will also unnessesarily increase mental load of filling your
form: instead of mindlessly pressing tab twice to skip a field, users will
have to associate the meaning of field highlight with tab order any time
they see the form. Needless to say, this new behavior would be conditioned
by your software only, would go against common experience. Better highlight
the frequently used, "expert" fields and preserve complete tabbing sequence.
Also consider those infrequent occasions when the seldom fields do need to
be filled. We have good memory of rhythm and tabbing blends effortlessly
with keyboard typing. Whenever the user would have to use "infrequent"
fields they would fairly effortlessly change the rhythm from for
example 1-1-3-1-2 to 1-1-1-1-1-2. Consider the alternative:
1-1-mouse-click-keyboard-mouse-click-keyboard-tab-1-2 - do it once every
hour and you'll quickly realiize that you are working too hard (could be
viable option if you have to do it only once a day).
I liked Jack's suggestion of customization initially, but then realized that
it wouldn't work since the fields need to be used from time to time. For the
same reason "show-hide options" interface could become annoying very quickly
if user need to show-n-hide frequently enough.
And so once more the appropriatness of solution will depend on answer to the
simple time question: "How infrequent is seldom?" (hard to get away from the
time aspect in interaction design).
--
Oleh Kovalchuke
Interaction Design is Design of Time
http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm
On 6/18/06, Simon Asselbergs <interaction-designer@...> wrote:
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
> > >> Should all fields using tabfocus events, or only the most used input
> > pattern? What is the best practice?
> >
> > Have Tab index for all fields, for following reasons:
> >
> > 1. The users who use tab are going to ofcourse rely on keyboards , hence
> > having tab index for selected fields would require them to change input
> > devices in case any other field has ot be selected, this breaks flow.
> You
> > can take this oportuity to rationalize the form and may be remove fields
> > that are there for wrong reasons
>
> It is not that the users rely only on keyboard, they also have a mouse. I
> can't narrow down the number of fields in this case. There are also fields
> that edit a table, such as Male, Female, Unknown. This will almost never
> need to be editted. But these must be present on the form. If you have all
> fields tabindexed, it becomes 26 [Tab]-key clicks.
>
> The user where the application is targeted at is not a consumer, but an
> employee. They have to be able to have fast input times for their most
> regular input patterns. So I thought if reducing the number of fields is not
> an option, than excluding seldom used fields fomr the tab focus is.
>
>
> > 2. It makes the form unpredictable, as they would not know what next tab
> > index would do
>
> True, but that is a problem that could be fixed easily with visual aids.
>
>
> > 3. Non-sighted users cannot use pointing device like mouse, but rely on
> > devices like keyboard,they would have no way to access other form
> fields.
>
> The application already doesn't take care of Non-sighted users. They
> aren't included in our target group.
>
> Has anyone have experience with the same kind of situation?
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
>
> Search for businesses by name, location, or phone number. -Lycos Yellow
> Pages
>
>
> http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss@...
> 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@...
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss@...
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@...
Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
« Return to Thread: usability of tab focus
| Free Forum Powered by Nabble | Forum Help |