Take the 2-minute tour ×
User Experience Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for user experience researchers and experts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am working on a Web Application (not a website with forms). It is a fairly exhaustive system with 250+ unique pages design. It has pages/sections/ settings where the main “actions” to be performed are typically as

  • Save/ Save Tab/ Save Section
  • Submit
  • Update

Or another example is I have multiple settings options where I create many “New” entities –

  • New Form
  • New Customer
  • New Rule
  • Add New
  • Add Account

I can opt for simplification and consistency – But I land up on counter intuitive scenarios where I click “Add New” and end up Deleting/ Banning some entity.

I classify buttons into broad 2 categories –

  • Most Likely Desired Action – Save, Submit, Apply
  • Housekeeping – Reset, Revert, Cancel

Any tips on adopting a naming convention for growing Web Application?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

You're right to consider it, and to favour consistency.

Being consistent should absolutely not mean that "add new" deletes anything - I cannot see how that arose.

'Update' is nice because it has the connotation that it is a repeatable action. As long as this is true, then it is more desirable than the intimidating 'Submit' and all the fear of incorrect data entry that goes with it.

Your new entities have commonality in 'Add New' - I would suggest implementing 'Add New' only where "new what?" is blindingly obvious, and in places with multiple possible new entries - 'Add New Column', 'Add New Row', 'Add New Account', etc.

Avoid this with 'Update' though - it is far nicer UX to be able to modify multiple entries before updating them as a whole.

Be as general as possible, and stick to it where you can. But never ever ever blindly stick to a naming convention for conventions sake, above all else, at the expense of names making sense.

If you take your scheme to the point where "add" deletes something then you're implementing it wrong.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.