Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
cs.umd.edu
Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
1–10 of 173 posts
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#2These seem common sense, but it's good to see them written down.
The one about giving users closure in a sequence of tasks is kind of novel. I like it.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#3Not sure that Strive for Consistency should be a golden rule of all interface design. Software maybe. But the reality is the world is inconsistent and humans mental model of tasks are inconsistent. Sometimes its better to design an interface that conforms to the world or the mental model.
As a random example: You could have an interface on a car that is almost entirely touch screens. You might see replacing the steering wheel with a touch screen interface. That would be consistent but not a good mapping to people's mental model.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#4Can an expert explain some context here?? This seems like a less-well-phrased version of Norman’s principles, which were the ones I was taught in HCI class.
The author is clearly some sort of textbook author so they know what they’re talking about, but these principles seem like they were written without considering past work. Like “short term memory load” seems like a phrase that would be replaced by “cognitive load” by most authors, even if it’s technically a little bit less specific. Some of the principles are pretty much identical (consistency), while others seem oddly phrased (like “prevent errors” instead of “constraints”).
Obviously these principles are great, just seems like there has to be a story about the academic drama here.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#5Not sure that Strive for Consistency should be a golden rule of all interface design. Software maybe. But the reality is the world is inconsistent and humans mental model of tasks are inconsistent. Sometimes its better to design an interface that conforms to the world or the mental model. As a random example: You could have an interface on a car that is almost entirely touch screens. You might see replacing the steer…
Not sure that is the best comparison because it removes the mechanical need for leverage, even with power steering.
Now that we have more electric steer by wire... maybe.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#6Some good stuff here, but generally I’d disagree with:
> Prevent errors: As much as possible, design the interface so that users cannot make serious errors; for example, gray out menu items that are not appropriate and do not allow alphabetic characters in numeric entry fields (Section 3.3.5
This sounds nice in theory, but in practice too many guardrails like this will just confuse users. “Why can’t I type text here??” It’s often better to allow mistakes but also offer immediate explanatory feedback if something is incorrect.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#7A designer I worked with years ago had a great explanation for why consistency is important.
It’s not about a limited colour palette or a careful selection of fonts no one will ever notice. Chasing the specifics makes horrible software. Some people equate less diversity in their UI to more consistency.
It’s about letting someone become an expert in your software.
Microsoft office was always his example. People pride themselves on “knowing” Microsoft office. They jump between all of the apps because they have a feel for the inertia of “office”. I have the exact same feeling in Vim. I just know how things are expected to be, and new (well made) plugins tend to respect those patterns.
Office and (Neo)Vim aren’t exceptional examples of UI, but they are uniquely stable.
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#8A designer I worked with years ago had a great explanation for why consistency is important. It’s not about a limited colour palette or a careful selection of fonts no one will ever notice. Chasing the specifics makes horrible software. Some people equate less diversity in their UI to more consistency. It’s about letting someone become an expert in your software. Microsoft office was always his example. People pride…
It's possibly one of the reasons why so many people were bent out of shape when MS introduced the adaptive ribbon shenanigans that tried to 'help' by only showing the most likely options. Really knocked my ability to find stuff
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#9Not sure that Strive for Consistency should be a golden rule of all interface design. Software maybe. But the reality is the world is inconsistent and humans mental model of tasks are inconsistent. Sometimes its better to design an interface that conforms to the world or the mental model. As a random example: You could have an interface on a car that is almost entirely touch screens. You might see replacing the steer…
Think of it more like this.
On page A, you have a button. It looks like a button. When you click it, a dialog opens that confirms you want to perform an action.
On page B, you click on the button, and it's a dropdown. You now have lost a sense of the mental model of the application world.
It's possible that you may want one of three actions based on your mental model, but the visual should lead you to know "this is different."
If you have something that looks like a
Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)
#10Not sure that Strive for Consistency should be a golden rule of all interface design. Software maybe. But the reality is the world is inconsistent and humans mental model of tasks are inconsistent. Sometimes its better to design an interface that conforms to the world or the mental model. As a random example: You could have an interface on a car that is almost entirely touch screens. You might see replacing the steer…
> that are applicable in most interactive systems. These principles, derived from experience and refined over three decades, require validation and tuning for specific design domains. No list such as this can be complete, but even the original list from 1985, has been well received as a useful guide to students and designers.
The author already caveated that they aren't absolutes. That is, they aren't declaring you should follow these rules off a figurative cliff. That would be stupid. The presumption is that people would still exercise judgement.