The user starts an action, and, afterwards, the system determines that some special condition is present which warrants further confirmation from the user:         &ndash; Wireframes created with   In the example above, "No" would do exactly the same as "Cancel". Should the "Cancel" button still be present?  My reason not to include it: It would be redundant and users would wonder about the difference between "No" and "Cancel".  My reason to include it: It allows an "easy way out" for the user: "I don't want to read, think about, and understand the evil scary message box; please just pretend I didn't start the action at all."  Note: I do appreciate alternative suggestions (such as a completely different message box design), but I would also appreciate feedback on which one of those two options is preferred (for example, in situations where the UI library offers limited options).
122236
I remember once reading an article that said whenever you present a messagebox with a Yes/No choice, you should always also provide a Cancel button, even if it does the same as No.  The rationale was that if the users know that Cancel is always the "safe" button to click if they don't understand why the message box was displayed, or are confused by the question.           &ndash; Wireframes created with   I've followed this advice for years (even though I can no longer remember where I originally heard it), but a number of people have complained about it, saying that they would prefer a simple Yes/No.   So now I am wondering whether it is (or ever was) in fact best practice. If a message box presents a Yes/No choice, should it also offer Cancel (in the case where Cancel and No have the same effect)?
13185
I have created lightning quick action to add my component for some functionality.   so from my quick action. When I do some validation like       var opp = component.get("v.objOpportunity");     if(!opp.Name.length || !opp.CloseDate.length )     {         var toastEvent = $A.get("e.force:showToast");         toastEvent.setParams({             "message": 'Opportunity name and close date can not be empty.',             "type": "Error"         });         toastEvent.fire();         return;     }   So the toast message display behind the modal. Please check below screenshot.   Any solution for this issue? I don't want to write custom error message functionality to display to user.
47940
How do you think about disabling the submit-button until the user has completed the form or the required fields?   I find similar questions here on ux.se and somebody answered that the user will think that the form is broken or not immediately realize whats going on.  I think hiding is not that good but a disabling (e.g. grayscale, opacity, ...) plus a short text in the button would improve usability because the user realise that he still has to fill out something.  Is there anybody with experience or examples besides the usual error-messages/validation after submitting?
110462
I try to delete Action.005 permanently.    But I don't know how. If I click on the X    then it is still in the list.    I already researched without success, I even managed to loose all my animations by attempting to apply a fix, so I want to be cautious now... How can I do this?
65605
Whilst filling out a form on the Royal Mail site this morning, I came across this heresy of form design: the self-negating checkbox...    This required careful (re)reading to ensure that:   I was actually opting out of the first set of marketing questions I did not have to tick the second group of boxes as these were default opt-out ... I was not actually going crazy   The mixed metaphor is confusing enough to me, but I was under the impression that (in EU countries at least) the legal requirement was for all marketing preference questions to now be opt-in by default, not opt-out?  Has any notable comparative research been done into opt-in versus opt-out options on forms to see which are more annoying / easier to understand? The inconsistency across sites just from one country is mindboggling, never mind an apparent lack of international standard. Is it just me failing to wrap my head around things still being opt-out by default or does nobody else actually care?
61488
Designing an interface for a CMS (Content Management System), I stumbled upon a paradox and I'm a bit confused about what to do and why to do it..  Context  Before deleting an album, the user is asked to confirm the action.  Green "Yes"    Red "Yes"    Which option is more intuitive for the user?
39503
I am wondering if we should use  or  for buttons and headings in websites and web/mobile apps? Title Case: Manage my Account Delete my Account  Sentence case: Manage my account Delete my account  In  I found the recommendation 'choose your style and be consistent'. This is it? Aren't there any other (additional) recommendations or sources. Like for specific use cases or apps where the one style would be preferred over the other? Edit: The question refers primarily to English, but differences in other languages are also good to know.
77570
Clicking on one of the buttons in  election, I saw this notice pop up:  But it showed way down here!  If my scrollbar had been any farther up the page, I wouldn't have seen that.  Can we make the notice pop out next to the button, to avoid mistakes like this?  I also don't know why this would be by design; the &quot;voting on comments on deleted posts&quot; notice doesn't popup near the answer icon, for instance. Or, make it like the Vote Down privilege dropdown:
18522
If I want the user to revert their operation of selecting an item, should I say: "Unselect the option" or "Deselect the option"?
46191
I'm still getting flack about . I downvoted an answer and added a comment explaining my reason. I was later convinced by other comments that it was not a good reason for downvoting. Upon attempting to retract my vote, I inadvertently locked it in.  The hover-text still (over a year later) says I can "click again to undo". But it's a big fat lie.  My specific problem has been resolved. But, I have stumbled across other questions where users have done this. In keeping with the push to help new users not to discover rules after having broken them, I think this text needs to be a little more aware, a little more accurate.
37444
When reviewing a question in the Reopen Votes queue, there are two main options: Leave Closed and Nominate for Reopening.  If I click Nominate for Reopening, a message box appears asking me if I am sure I want to vote to reopen:    If I click cancel, a second message box appears with the same question.   If I click cancel on the second message box is dismissed the message box, but nothing else happens.  If I click okay, a second message box appears with the same question.   If I click okay on the second message box is dismissed the message box, and a vote to reopen is cast. If I click cancel on the second message box is dismissed the message box, and a vote to reopen is cast.    I haven't yet exhausted all possible ways of interacting with these message boxes, but there is definitely at least one bug here.    A similar, and possibly related issue exists with the Leave Closed option. If I click Leave Closed, a message box appears asking me if I am sure I want to vote to reopen:    If I click cancel, the message box is dismissed, and my vote to leave closed is cast.  If I instead click okay the message box is dismissed, and my vote to leave closed is cast, but I occasionally see the error, "An error occurred when reviewing this item. Please try again."    Using Google Chrome Version 27.0.1453.116 m
90856
Ok, I'm doing a bunch of RIA/AJAX stuff and need to create a "pretty", custom confirm box which is a DIV (not the built-in javascript confirm). I'm having trouble determining how to accomplish a pause in execution to give the user a chance to accept or decline the condition before either resuming or halting execution. (depending upon their answer)   So here's the general flow of logic I'm dealing with:   User selects an item from dropdown and clicks button. In client-side javascript eventhandler for button, I need to check a (this is the key) SERIES of conditions for the item they chose in dropdown.  These conditions could possibly result in not showing any confirmation at all or possibly only some of the conditions may evaluate to true which means I'll need to ask the user to accept or decline the condition before proceeding. Only one confirmation should be show at a time.   To demonstrate the logic:  function buttonEventHandler() {  if (condition1) {   if(!showConfirmForCondition1) // want execution to pause while waiting for user response.      return; // discontinue execution }  if (condition2) {   if (!showConfirmForCondition2) // want execution to pause while waiting for user response.       return; // discontinue execution }  if (condition3) {   if (!showConfirmForCondition3) // want execution to pause while waiting for user response.       return; // discontinue execution }  ...   }    If anybody has dealt with this challenge before and found a solution, help would be greatly appreciated. As a note, I'm also using the MS Ajax and jQuery libraries although I haven't found any functionality that may already be included in those for this problem.
31007
Help!!!  I don't know quite what happened, I was getting frustrated, trying to somehow escape the backticks inside the code formatting. I clicked the edit button too many times, and then the above happened. Perhaps I clicked it to fast, I don't know, but I then got lots of boxes.    Edit:  Based on a test case below, the problem is simply caused by pressing edit while you still have an edit box open. They all go away when you press cancel anywhere once. This makes it much easier to reproduce, and, while not very important, perhaps still something to be fixed.  Note on the pattern:  When you click the first time, you get one box, as normal. When you click again, you get one extra empty box at the top, and another normal box above that. At each click, one empty box is added per existing normal boxes, plus one normal box. What is going on?
46698
My project has a table with '+add' button and filtering. The add button opens a dialog to add item, and then to 'save' which closes it too Today I noticed the following flow:  Filter table on subject with value 'dummySubject'  Add new item with subject 'somethingelse'  save and close the new item ==&gt; the new item is shown in the table   So the outcome is that an item that does not qualify the filtering appears in the table. When I asked around I got the following answer  We don't want the new item to 'disappear' on creation just because it does not qualify the filtering. So we display it If you filter again, it will disappear as it should  I can almost understand that logic, but still it sounds wrong. I would rather have like a toaster saying 'new item create' with a 'goto' link. My question is  is the current user experience considered a reasonable one? what is the best practice way to handle such scenario?      &ndash; Wireframes created with
71894
I was using the Android app earlier, and decided not to post a comment after beginning. When I cancelled, I was mildly confused by the choice I was offered:    "Nevermind," to me, could also mean "never mind, I don't want to write this comment after all."  Can this be replaced with a simpler and less confusing text? The simplest option would probably be "Do you want to discard your comment? [Yes/No]" (ht Shadow Wizard, Shub)
64548
If I add a comment but navigate (by mistake) to another page, I lose my unfinished comment (ok, depends on browser etc). On the other hand, when formulating a question, and I click on a link by mistake, I'm asked if I really want to leave.  It would be nice to have this warning for comments as well.
19242
I flagged a post today, typed out a fairly thorough explanation, clicked the button... and got told that I'd already flagged this post (for something else, which I'd forgotten about) so this flag wasn't allowed.  (This happens if the first flag is still active.)  The dialogue with my explanation was gone at this point, so if I wanted to communicate with the moderators about that, I was going to have to start over.  (In case you're wondering how this could happen, one flag was related to the post itself and one was related to the user -- there being no way to flag a user directly, you have to hang it off of a post.  But I've also seen this with cases where the first flag hangs around unhandled for a week or two and I've forgotten about it.)  Since the system is going to detect that I've already flagged a post and reject a second flag, can it do that after I click the "flag" link instead of waiting until the end of the process?  (Or gray out the link so I can't click it in the first place?)  2015-12-18: someone suggested to me in chat today that this had been implemented, so I tested again.  The behavior has not changed: I flagged a post using "other", then flagged it again (also "other") before the first flag was handled, and the flag was rejected only after I'd typed the message.  (I did this on a site where I'm a moderator so I could then clean up after myself.)