We have built a product tour, but due to the fact that it has to be editable by people who don't know code, it was done on a framework that uses twitter bootstrap's boilerplate and modules to build. (sort of like D7).

Here is the issue, the tour itself is a massive workaround of code due to the problem mentioned above. It works, but it's not the greatest, but it is our best solution for the challenges at hand.

With out explaining it too indepth, it works by using each 'slide' of tour as an index, but the indexes are not found in the DOM so typing $('.tour-panel'); in my console returns tour-panel[] which is basically saying it doesn't exist.

With that little preface, if we send 2 of the same calls to link to a tour panel in a row (ie: clicking 'target' twice) it will break the panels and blank out the whole tour.

Our solutions (although kind of dirty) is using css to disable clicks when those panels are active.

.current-slide .active{
    cursor: auto;

This just changes the cursor to the normal one, and makes the link unclickable. It only affects the link you are currently on. Is this kind of disable considered bad UX?

I understand that generally disabling basic functions is considered bad UX, but given the situation and problem at hand, I was wondering if this is okay to do. The way I see it, this would be better UX than the whole tour breaking because someone double clicked, but would like your opinions as well.

The page in question


Is it possible instead to just disable clicking after the first click and indicate to the user that something is now happening as a result of that first click by way of a cursor change or notification?

This way the user knows that their initial click has indeed registered a response and they can't "stuff it up" by doing a second click. And the fact they can't click again is nothing more than a further acknowledgment that their first click has actually registered.

And to answer your last question, I agree it would be better UX than the whole tour breaking because someone double clicked.

  • If it were more 'app based' I suppose the notification could work. I didn't anticipate a double click in that aspect though. I anticipated it as, clicking a main heading, going 3 pages deep, then clicking the main heading again (which would break the tour). Feb 11 '16 at 21:45
  • @ether I've only just noticed the preview link at the end of your question. I've had a look and it works and looks just fine. In fact the tour looks great. And no, I don't think disabling the click would be considered bad practice when it's only affecting the link the user is already on. In fact, I have done this by design many times. And, now that I've seen the site, I wouldn't bother with any sort of notification - in fact, that would just get in the users's way!
    – Monomeeth
    Feb 11 '16 at 23:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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