Timeline for What is the correct way to reference GUI controls when writing content and copy
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 27, 2016 at 11:31 | history | suggested | Montag451 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
formatting
|
| May 27, 2016 at 11:07 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 27, 2016 at 11:31 | |||||
| Apr 15, 2015 at 10:02 | comment | added | Roger Attrill | @Montag451 - I just answered my own question - hope this helps. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 10:01 | answer | added | Roger Attrill | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 7:26 | comment | added | Montag451 | Roger have you ever come up with a solution to your problem? I'm having almost the same problem nowadays and stumbled up on your question. | |
| Oct 7, 2013 at 23:59 | comment | added | uxzapper | Use pictures as the primary means of identifying things. | |
| Oct 5, 2013 at 18:16 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackUX/status/386555516149063680 | ||
| Oct 4, 2013 at 17:00 | comment | added | Marjan Venema | Ah yes, tasks and time constraints. Lovely things. :-)) | |
| Oct 4, 2013 at 15:23 | comment | added | Roger Attrill | @MarjanVenema I agree with you, there's a list of stuff as long as both our arms put together that I would improve. Unfortunately, my task here is purely to improve documentation for users! | |
| Oct 4, 2013 at 11:56 | comment | added | Marjan Venema | @RogerAttrill: ok, I'd submit though that the label isn't the place to explain things? Might be better to have a shorter label and the explanatory text under or on the other side of the control. Helps scanning for the control as well. | |
| Oct 4, 2013 at 10:18 | comment | added | Roger Attrill | @MarjanVenema also agreed in general and where possible, but sometimes the label is very long (explanatory) or inappropriate for use as a reference. | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 20:58 | comment | added | Jim Dagg | @MarjanVenema Agreed. The label is enough to uniquely identify a control -- nothing wrong with saying "Check Don't show me this message again" (or "Place a check mark beside"). | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 18:14 | comment | added | Marjan Venema | What's wrong with refering to the controls by their label? "Switch on [feature] by checking/ticking/selecting [feature's checkbox label]"... In the user (!) documentation I have written, I never referred to a control by their type, but always by their "name" (label). That's how someone will find them in the UI anyway... | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 16:05 | answer | added | Tony Bolero | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 14:15 | answer | added | Virtuosi Media | timeline score: 1 | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 13:59 | history | edited | Roger Attrill | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
changed title to be about referencing controls rather than asking for terminology
|
| Oct 3, 2013 at 13:55 | comment | added | Roger Attrill | I'd be happy-ish using drop-down menu consistently within the documentation, but ComboBox seems clumsy and too techy - I'm not sure imposing development language words on end users is the right way to go just for the sake of consistency across all of docs, back-end, front-end, whatever? | |
| Oct 3, 2013 at 13:38 | comment | added | JonW♦ |
If they're tech-savvy then why not use the actual names the controls go by in the code (Such as 'ComboBox)? That way you keep the same terminology throughout the documentation, code implementation and front-end too.
|
|
| Oct 3, 2013 at 13:35 | history | asked | Roger Attrill | CC BY-SA 3.0 |