Project

General

Profile

Bug #11434

No selection arrow on campus drop down field

Added by Luke Waltzer over 2 years ago. Updated over 2 years ago.

Status:
Rejected
Priority name:
Normal
Assignee:
Category name:
-
Target version:
Start date:
2019-05-07
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

There's a selection arrow for the primary purpose metadata menu, but not the campus menu. Might confuse some users. Screenshot attached (Mac/Chrome)

History

#1 Updated by Boone Gorges over 2 years ago

  • Assignee set to Sonja Leix

The Campus field is multi-select, while the Primary Purpose is not. (This is the default behavior of the Select2 library, and we discussed it briefly during implementation.)

Once you click/tab into the field, the options appear, so it seems to me like it won't actually confuse anyone. But if others disagree, we can look at adding the arrow - though it may need some design work, since once you start selecting options, the field contains little boxes with Xs, which may be confusing next to the arrow.

#2 Updated by Luke Waltzer over 2 years ago

Ah, got it. I think the discordance I picked up on was that the fields looked identical except for that arrow... since the "Please Select" indicates an action is required, could maybe even just remove the arrow from the Primary Purpose... but not a high priority at all imo.

#3 Updated by Boone Gorges over 2 years ago

  • Target version set to 1.16

Putting this ticket into a milestone so that it's not lost. Not sure if we're planning any more holistic evaluation of the new tools, but if so, this potential interface improvement could be rolled into it.

#4 Updated by Sonja Leix over 2 years ago

Yes, this issue was brought up during implementation. As soon as the user interacts with the field it reveals its functionality.
I'm leading towards keeping the default behaviors of those two types of selectors, unless several users voice their confusion.

I think I heard during today's call that Colin conducted some user testing on this post launch?! Did I get that right? I'd be curious to learn if any of those users got stuck on this.

#5 Updated by Colin McDonald over 2 years ago

I don't believe I have any post-launch user testing data to provide on this; we just have the data on what people have been choosing when using these fields. I don't know if we can see whether people are skipping this field and then needing to come back to it (doubtful probably). If not, and absent more reports about confusion here, I'd lean toward keeping this as-is also.

#6 Updated by Sonja Leix over 2 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Sonja Leix to Boone Gorges

Colin McDonald wrote:

I don't believe I have any post-launch user testing data to provide on this; we just have the data on what people have been choosing when using these fields. I don't know if we can see whether people are skipping this field and then needing to come back to it (doubtful probably). If not, and absent more reports about confusion here, I'd lean toward keeping this as-is also.

Thanks for the feedback, Colin. Who makes a final call on things like this?

#7 Updated by Matt Gold over 2 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Rejected
  • Target version changed from 1.16 to Not tracked

Hi All -- let's leave this as is for now and then re-open/re-consider if we hear additional reports. I agree with Luke that there is a bit of visual confusion here, but I don't think it's worth the dev/design time to address it unless we hear of other reports or discover them ourselves in user testing.

I've rejected for now, but we can come back to this. Boone, if you feel this is better not rejected and instead placed in Future Release, please put it there. thanks.

Also available in: Atom PDF