![]() To switch between alternate versions of a wireframe select the name of a version from the list in the properties panel or from the context menu in the Navigator panel. You can also add notes in the notes panel for the alternate to describe your thoughts on it or communicate to others about it. Changes that you make will not affect the original wireframe (shown as the Official Version). Once you have created an alternate version you can edit it just like any other wireframe, including adding assets and symbols. To rename the alternate double-click on the name in the alternates versions list or use the context or right-click menu and select "Rename." When you are working on an alternate version the Navigator panel will show the alternate name in parentheses. When an alternate exists an icon will appear next to the name in the Navigator panel indicating that there are alternates. Clicking the "+" (plus) icon when an alternate is selected creates an alternate of the selected version rather than the official version. Yes if the text is too long, the number of possible entries is more than 10 and your user is not an accountant.Note: You can create an alternate of an alternate. I would really help if you showed how the final information is going to be displayed.Ĭan there be possible usability issues with the dropdown approach? Since I do not know how the information is going to be displayed this proposition might be completely inadequate :Ĭhoose a random record and display it, add a link icon with the number of alternatives and when cliked on, show the alternatives and allow the user to pick one. So at the end, how is the "treated" information going to be displayed ? Stick with it and contextualize your merging. I am just trying to make a point : tables can be very effective, but it should not be systematically used just because it echoes the data base) ( edit : that is not true, not just accountants like them. Now let say that is the type of information you are dealing with :Ĭan't the design be a little bit more contextual ? So the user can make a smart and educated choice and not something repetitive and dull. There is really a need when the information is with a rich content only a human can create meaning out of. If the information is something picked-up from a list then your application should do the merge by itslef. What is the information you want them to merge ? If it is a figure, then there is no point merging, they are already the same. Your design is not exactly user centered : you want them to do your job so a least be more gentle with them. a user may not see what they have overridden after completing that without the columns. The main problem I see with the select option is that a user cannot see the options before them and it seems a bit fiddly when it comes to the override text field. I say this rather than offer a solution to merging more than 2 at a time as I think you will get into a messy table with more than 2, it is often the case in these scenarios that a user already knows which record is best and offering a table of 5 records for example may be overkill. latest and earliest) and still have the option to repeat merging with a different record and the newly merged record. If there are more than 2 records to be merged then perhaps you could, as a first step, offer a list to resolve of the records and their created dates (and expandable details) to let the user choose either one to prevail (and thereby bypass the merge table) or select which 2 to merge with your 2-record merge table and keep the table limited to 2 records, that way the user can ensure they are choosing the best 2 versions to merge (e.g. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |