[tryton-dev] Colors of fields
Hi, For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and switch to red when validated as empty). I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons: - the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some thèmes. - it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is only based on color. So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and readable for accessibility. What do you think? Has anyone a better idea? [1] https://developer.gnome.org/accessibility-devel-guide/3.8/idp5133984.html.en -- Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields
On 2015-07-04 10:49, Jordi Esteve wrote: On 04/07/15 08:58, Cédric Krier wrote: Hi, For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and switch to red when validated as empty). I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons: - the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some thèmes. - it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is only based on color. So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and readable for accessibility. What do you think? Has anyone a better idea? I suggest to not remove the current behaviour. The blue color and switching to red if the field is not filled is intuitive and clear for most people, the asterisk is not intuitive (needs a previous explanation), so I suggest adding a * without removing current behaviour. This will not fix the first point about theme. -- Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields
I am curious, which context the color fail on some themes? because I never have saw to fail this feature 2015-07-04 4:39 GMT-05:00 Cédric Krier cedric.kr...@b2ck.com: On 2015-07-04 10:49, Jordi Esteve wrote: On 04/07/15 08:58, Cédric Krier wrote: Hi, For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and switch to red when validated as empty). I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons: - the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some thèmes. - it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is only based on color. So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and readable for accessibility. What do you think? Has anyone a better idea? I suggest to not remove the current behaviour. The blue color and switching to red if the field is not filled is intuitive and clear for most people, the asterisk is not intuitive (needs a previous explanation), so I suggest adding a * without removing current behaviour. This will not fix the first point about theme. -- Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL Email/Jabber: cedric.kr...@b2ck.com Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields and feedback for current interface
* Jordi Esteve: Re: [tryton-dev] Colors of fields (Sat, 04 Jul 2015 10:49:44 +0200): On 04/07/15 08:58, Cédric Krier wrote: Hi, For now, we put a blue color on entries when they are required (and switch to red when validated as empty). I think it is a bad practice for 2 reasons: - the colors are not custumizable and so they could not work on some thèmes. - it is doesn't help the accessibility [1] as this information is only based on color. So I was thinking instead about adding a * on the labels of the required fields. This still stay quite visual (but not too much) and readable for accessibility. What do you think? Has anyone a better idea? I suggest to not remove the current behaviour. The blue color and switching to red if the field is not filled is intuitive and clear for most people, the asterisk is not intuitive (needs a previous explanation), so I suggest adding a * without removing current behaviour. Marking a field with a star is On/Off, while currently with colors we have the evidence, that a field is required *and* showing after the validation, which fields missed the validation. So by replacing colors with stars we would lose one information level. Perhaps this could be solved by differentiating with small and big star (small for required field, big for missing validation). OTOH I would appreciate indeed, that the idea to surround the field with a red line instead of coloring the background would make its way [0]. This change would make the interface less shouting, but more informative. BTW the current state after [1] indeed confirms my reservations about a unsteady moving interface [2]. You did your best to make it unobtrusive, but the result is nevertheless, that after clicking a record and shifting of the interface the mouse pointer is located above a different record and the user has to re-orientate himself. I really don't like those unintentional jumping interfaces on user interactions, perhaps other Trytonistas could give feedback as well. Even if in sao the info bar should be better placed at the top (I didn't have a look at that), this shouldn't dictate the behavior of the gtk client. I don't feel it to be the right approach to try to copy *slavishly* the gtk and the web interface. Both interfaces have different pros and cons. When the web interface affords different means for informational messages, the gtk client shouldn't lose parts of his usability just to match the layout of this info bar in the web client. Just last but not least: I would prefer to have the messages centered like in the initial proposal [3]. Currently they display left-aligned. [0] https://bugs.tryton.org/msg20371 [1] http://hg.tryton.org/tryton/rev/4aabbd421cf5 [2] https://bugs.tryton.org/issue3465 [3] https://bugs.tryton.org/file2223/form_error.png -- Mathias Behrle MBSolutions Gilgenmatten 10 A D-79114 Freiburg Tel: +49(761)471023 Fax: +49(761)4770816 http://www.m9s.biz UStIdNr: DE 142009020 PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6 pgpkMU6crk1XU.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
