User Experience Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for user experience researchers and experts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I have a tool bar of buttons. The state changes every time user interact with it (fig. 1).
Fig. 1
Sometimes application allows user to refresh view only, so other buttons are invisible (fig. 2).
Fig. 2
My questions are:
1) What is the best: disable inactive buttons or do its invisible?
2) Is a good practice to stay buttons on its place or move them to left (right) while other ones are invisible (see fig.2, fig. 3)?
Fig. 3
I can see a problem with inconsistency if you remove the buttons entirely and start moving active buttons around the toolbar.
The usual practice is to provide inactive buttons with an inactive state eg grey or faded. The additional benefits of this approach is that you are keeping the user informed via visual feedback of the state of the system; invisible items cannot do this.
Research has shown that consistent placement of the buttons is more important than labels, icons, or colour of the button.
From these results, we inferred the location of the icon is more important than the visual imagery. People remember where things are, not what they look like.
This was also the reasoning behind Windows 7's new taskbar with pinned applications, and Office's Ribbon.
I think that your example should follow the same reasoning. Personally, I would be frustrated if the buttons' positions changed every time I clicked something or between sessions.
Also, the lack of a button I'm used to could make me wonder whether that feature was removed from the product altogether, and not just disabled at that precise moment.
The disabled buttons should be greyed out, even if barely visible, and the active buttons should stay where they've been.
I would never want to force my customers to "find" the right button when they have already used it. Even moving it a little is initiating a hunt depending on different circumstances. A grayed out button is common knowledge that it can't be used until another action activates it. Shifting and adding buttons shouldn't reduce clutter if your design is strong and already uncluttered.
Denial of a particular function can be mainly attributed for two reasons in most applications.
In the case of menus, buttons, toolbars, icons and many UI elements the following behaviors are considered normal for each of the above situations.
I would say it depends on the application. If your buttons are located in a fixed toolbar, then they should always be visible so that the user can get used to what commands exist, during what states they are available, and where they can find them.
If your buttons are dynamically added alongside a repeated or temporary control (such as a list of items each with its own set of action items), then it isn't a bad idea to reduce clutter on the screen by only displaying buttons for possible actions.
