Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Double-clicking on the Web

ma.ttias.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#61

Post by bwat48 »

creshal wrote: post #10

Are double click actions still a thing? Windows has had an option for single-click mode since forever, and most users I know use it – mainly because they're used to single click from the web. The remainder and most Mac/Linux users don't even bother and navigate with the keyboard. I can't remember the last time I had to double-click anything, except for text selection.

I work in tech support and I have literally never come across a user using single click mode in windows, nor does anyone I know use it.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#62

Post by sebastianconcpt »

Interesting problem and valid questioning but flawled reasoning.

"because our brains are just hardwired to double-click everything." that might be true for people that formed muscular memory in the golden days of the mouse and heavy OS use (as oposed to heavy internet use).

An acceptable solution has to anticipate the muscular memory we are generating in legions of mobile users: tapping.

If we apply that author's central argument to today's mobile influence, then who instead of tapping will have her brain just wired to double tap?

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#63

Post by sjwright »

babby wrote: post #53
sjwright wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a denial-of-service tool so convenient for you?

Thats a poor argument. Literally no one gets DoS'ed by a few guys F5'ing in coordination. If your server is so poorly set up as to allow any small number of IP's to impact it in any way then you are doing it wrong. When I was getting into nodejs a few years back I wrote DoS script to kill a site that was scraping content from one of my sites and posing it as their own. I made it just for shits n giggles in about 5 mi…

That is a poor deflection of the underlying point. It's absurd to conclude that an obviously undesirable behavior -- however unlikely to pose a problem in reality -- should not even be considered let alone addressed.

It could be as simple as a modest global rate limit on repeated GET requests to the same URL. We could start with 250 msec and see how that goes.

Or it could be as simple as limiting F5 reloads to once per keydown. Let users work for their accidental DoS attacks. :-)

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#64

Post by DonHopkins »

nailer wrote: post #56
userbinator wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or Macs... the "single click to select, double-click to apply default action" occurs both in Windows and MacOS.

OK I'm wrong. I use a Mac every day and thought they didn't do double click. Apparently it's a somewhat subconscious action.

Wasn't that the whole point of the article? How many times did he point that out? More than two:

>Everywhere in the Operating System, whether it's Windows or Mac OSX, the default behaviour to navigate between directories is by double-clicking them. We're trained to double-click anything.

>Want to open an application? Double-click the icon. Want to open an e-mail in your mail client? Double-click the subject. Double-clicks everywhere.

>We know we should only single-click a link. We know we should only click a form submit once. But sometimes, we double-click. Not because we do so intentionally, but because our brains are just hardwired to double-click everything.

>For techies like us, a double-click happens by accident. It's an automated double-click, one we don't really think about. One we didn't mean to do.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#65

Post by oldmanjay »

snowwolf wrote: post #50
dexen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, this should be solved server-side. Indeed it is possible to implement idempotent behavior of POST forms server-side. Even if a bit tedious to implement at first, it meshes very well with multi-user web apps, when several people may be changing the same underlying data simultaneously. One possible approach is carry in POST both old (original) state and new (user input) state, and apply it as a diff to underlyi…

The problem isn't idempotency as that just solves the problem of multiple synchronous submits (If order submitted what happens if order is submitted again). The real problem is the asynchronous nature of the web where both submissions could arrive at exactly the same time. And this is solved generally by using some kind of global lock (often at the database level).

coarse locking is only a possibility at fairly small scales, unless your users like waiting. CSRF protection is the solution here as well. this entire article could have one comment that says nothing more and it would perfect.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#66

Post by oldmanjay »

sjwright wrote: post #63
babby wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats a poor argument. Literally no one gets DoS'ed by a few guys F5'ing in coordination. If your server is so poorly set up as to allow any small number of IP's to impact it in any way then you are doing it wrong. When I was getting into nodejs a few years back I wrote DoS script to kill a site that was scraping content from one of my sites and posing it as their own. I made it just for shits n giggles in about 5 mi…

That is a poor deflection of the underlying point. It's absurd to conclude that an obviously undesirable behavior -- however unlikely to pose a problem in reality -- should not even be considered let alone addressed. It could be as simple as a modest global rate limit on repeated GET requests to the same URL. We could start with 250 msec and see how that goes. Or it could be as simple as limiting F5 reloads to once p…

what's absurd is protecting the server from a vanishingly rare accident by changing the client. if you feel you need to be protected, put that protection where it belongs, on the server, where it works against more likely things as well.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#67

Post by mmphosis »

creshal wrote: post #10

Are double click actions still a thing? Windows has had an option for single-click mode since forever, and most users I know use it – mainly because they're used to single click from the web. The remainder and most Mac/Linux users don't even bother and navigate with the keyboard. I can't remember the last time I had to double-click anything, except for text selection.

We single click links just like we single click buttons. Form buttons on a browser should behave like regular buttons in the operating system: single click.

Clicking an item in a list should select the item. Double clicking an item in a list should open it. This is the part that might be broken in the web browser because I see check boxes and all sorts of other UI gymnastics to enable the functionality of how a list works in file browsers, and email.

There are a few other UI things in the web browser that I think are slightly broken. These UI things are a legacy from the original web browser. For example check boxes and radio buttons separate the text from the check/radio box, but I think you should be able to click on the text to toggle the box -- yes, I know there are work-around using JavaScript, but basic UI should be consistent.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#68

Post by mbell »

jxf wrote: post #18

HTTP already handles this just fine if you have sensitive forms: your form can include a one-time token which your server validates. If the token has already been used, you don't process the second request. What we definitely shouldn't do (as the author suggests) is disable form submissions on subsequent clicks. What if the first response fails? You'll have to enter the entire form all over again, instead of being ab…

This just moves the concurrency issue to the client, particularly for xhr requests.

Say you double click on some action with a one time token, the first request gets to the server and succeeds while the second request fails due to the token being used. But, the response to the first request is delayed and the second response (failure) gets to the client first. The client can either 'obey' this failure response or wait till all in flight requests return (or maybe till one comes through with success). The solutions to dealing with this look a lot like debouncing/throttling the requests in the first place.

Using a one time token is very useful for avoiding multiple executions of non idempotent operations but it's really a separate issue from dealing with multiple requests/responses on the client. i.e. the UX.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#69

Post by scrollaway »

mbell wrote: post #68
jxf wrote: post #18

HTTP already handles this just fine if you have sensitive forms: your form can include a one-time token which your server validates. If the token has already been used, you don't process the second request. What we definitely shouldn't do (as the author suggests) is disable form submissions on subsequent clicks. What if the first response fails? You'll have to enter the entire form all over again, instead of being ab…

This just moves the concurrency issue to the client, particularly for xhr requests. Say you double click on some action with a one time token, the first request gets to the server and succeeds while the second request fails due to the token being used. But, the response to the first request is delayed and the second response (failure) gets to the client first. The client can either 'obey' this failure response or wai…

Subsequent requests to the same token don't have to fail - they just have to silently pass.

Re: Double-clicking on the Web

#70

Post by sanderjd »

johnbennyton wrote: post #26
creshal wrote: post #10

Are double click actions still a thing? Windows has had an option for single-click mode since forever, and most users I know use it – mainly because they're used to single click from the web. The remainder and most Mac/Linux users don't even bother and navigate with the keyboard. I can't remember the last time I had to double-click anything, except for text selection.

There's something particularly ugly about people who feign ignorance of the way people less technical than them do things, in order to make themselves sound more elite.

I get annoyed with this sort of unawareness too ("don't these people ever hang out with their families??"), but you're reading uncharitably. I see it as an unawareness of "how the other half lives", which can be overcome through self-awareness and active observation, rather than feigned ignorance to sound elite.
Post reply on HN