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
When managing lists or objects, what are the advantages of a "clone" action over "copy & paste", if any? What are the disadvantages? Or when should you use one pattern over another?
I assume a clone action would: 1. Automatically duplication an object in a list 2. Increment the name to something like "Object 1 copy" 3. Automatically enter the edit state/mode for the object in the list to allow the user to make changes. From there a user can cancel or save the changed object?
Thanks.
Copy and paste were originally intended to act between two containers (folder A, folder B).
Clone, on the other hand, is within-container.
Copy and paste are two actions, clone is one action. So if the user intention is to clone, why make this a two-action process when you can do with one?
Then:
- Automatically duplication an object in a list
Indeed
- Increment the name to something like "Object 1 copy"
This depends - in some systems the label is unique, in others it isn't (all TODO lists I know of allow you to put milk twice).
- Automatically enter the edit state/mode for the object in the list to allow the user to make changes.
This is nearly always useful with textual items (not always so for graphical ones); it all depends what the list is for and what the user needs are.
The advantage of copy/paste, as I see it, is that I've been trained to type cmd-C cmd-V to make a copy of something. The only way Clone would be more efficient than that would be if it had its own keyboard shortcut and if I memorized it.
