Elizabeth Buie <eb...@luminanze.com> writes: > At 12:50 AM -0400 7/29/09, Claudia wrote: > > I am of two minds on this. I have read some opinions that you don't need > a Cancel action at all (be it a button or a link), that you just need to > provide the user with clear alternatives to proceeding. I'm not convinced > of that, however; at least not in the general case. On the one hand, it > seems to me that people are accustomed to having a Cancel option in dialog > boxes and tend to expect the same elsewhere (e.g., Web apps). On the other > hand, I suspect that "Return to X" would *be* such a clearer alternative. > I do think it should be a button rather than a link, precisely because it > conveys the impression of performing an action rather than simply navigating.
I think if you rethink the problem as one of communication then the requirement becomes a lot clearer. If the situation is one in which the user has simply lost interest in the original task, then what they'll be looking for is a route back to whatever they were doing previously. In which case "cancel" is confusing and meaningless (what will "cancel" do? Will it clear the form? Take me to the home page). If the situation is one in which the user has started a transaction of some kind, then what they really want to do is kill that transaction to make sure it doesn't persist, OR they may wish to save the transaction for later, or whatever. Here "Return to X" isn't going to answer their question and is therefore unclear and confusing. Cian O'Connor ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
