Designing toggle icon [1 Attachment]

[Desilets, Alain]

I know this is a general UI design issue, but I am asking here because I
know many of you folks personally to be a friendly and helpful bunch.
But please feel free to tell me to post this somewhere else (and if so,
what list you recommend).

 

I need to design a clickable icon for use on a wiki system, which will
toggle watches on and off. When watches are on, the user receives email
notification of every change made to a page. If watches are off, he
doesn't.

 

The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up with, some
people interpret it as  representing the STATE of the watches, and some
people interpret it as the ACTION that will be done on the state of the
watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these two interpretations
tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye with a green
checkmark can be interpreted as:

 

-          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them OFF)

OR

-          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are
currently OFF)

 

Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list of icons
in the attached MS Word file with a dozen people or so, and I find this
contradiction applies with all of them.

 

This seems to be a common problem, for example, see:

 

   http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=11512

 

yet, I haven't been able to find a definitive, well accepted design
pattern for that.

 

Does any of you know of one?

 

Thx.

[Anders Ramsay]

Maybe the issue is using icons. Why not just have 'Start watching this  
page' and 'Stop watching this page' toggle button?

On Oct 30, 2009, at 1:19 PM, "Desilets, Alain" <alain.desilets@...
 > wrote:

> [Attachment(s) from Desilets, Alain included below]
>
> I know this is a general UI design issue, but I am asking here  
> because I know many of you folks personally to be a friendly and  
> helpful bunch. But please feel free to tell me to post this  
> somewhere else (and if so, what list you recommend).
>
>
>
> I need to design a clickable icon for use on a wiki system, which  
> will toggle watches on and off. When watches are on, the user  
> receives email notification of every change made to a page. If  
> watches are off, he doesn’t.
>
>
>
> The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up with,  
> some people interpret it as  representing the STATE of the watches,  
> and some people interpret it as the ACTION that will be done on the  
> state of the watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these two  
> interpretations tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye  
> with a green checkmark can be interpreted as:
>
>
>
> -          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them OFF)
>
> OR
>
> -          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are  
> currently OFF)
>
>
>
> Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list of  
> icons in the attached MS Word file with a dozen people or so, and I  
> find this contradiction applies with all of them.
>
>
>
> This seems to be a common problem, for example, see:
>
>
>
>    http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=11512
>
>
>
> yet, I haven’t been able to find a definitive, well accepted design  
> pattern for that.
>
>
>
> Does any of you know of one?
>
>
>
> Thx.
>
>

[Marjorie H Pries]

The problem seems to be in depending on the color to convey the meaning while the eye is static. Maybe if you tried a closed eye vs. an open eye and forgot about the colored checkmarks completely, then.

the idea of a ligthhouse with a signal beam vs. one without also came to my mind.

Marjorie


--- In agile-usability@..., "Desilets, Alain" <alain.desilets@...> wrote:
>

>  
>
> The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up with, some
> people interpret it as  representing the STATE of the watches, and some
> people interpret it as the ACTION that will be done on the state of the
> watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these two interpretations
> tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye with a green
> checkmark can be interpreted as:
>
>  
>
> -          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them OFF)
>
> OR
>
> -          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are
> currently OFF)
>
>  
>
> Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list of icons
> in the attached MS Word file with a dozen people or so, and I find this
> contradiction applies with all of them.
>
>  
> Thx.
>

[Desilets, Alain]

This button is one of many on a toolbar, and I don't have sufficient
real-estate to put long labels like this.

 

________________________________

From: agile-usability@...
[mailto:agile-usability@...] On Behalf Of Anders Ramsay
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:37 PM
To: agile-usability@...
Subject: Re: [agile-usability] Designing toggle icon

 






Maybe the issue is using icons. Why not just have 'Start watching this
page' and 'Stop watching this page' toggle button?


On Oct 30, 2009, at 1:19 PM, "Desilets, Alain"
<alain.desilets@...> wrote:

         

        I know this is a general UI design issue, but I am asking here
because I know many of you folks personally to be a friendly and helpful
bunch. But please feel free to tell me to post this somewhere else (and
if so, what list you recommend).

         

        I need to design a clickable icon for use on a wiki system,
which will toggle watches on and off. When watches are on, the user
receives email notification of every change made to a page. If watches
are off, he doesn't.

         

        The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up
with, some people interpret it as  representing the STATE of the
watches, and some people interpret it as the ACTION that will be done on
the state of the watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these two
interpretations tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye with
a green checkmark can be interpreted as:

         

        -          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them
OFF)

        OR

        -          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are
currently OFF)

         

        Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list
of icons in the attached MS Word file with a dozen people or so, and I
find this contradiction applies with all of them.

         

        This seems to be a common problem, for example, see:

         

           <http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=11512>
http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=11512

         

        yet, I haven't been able to find a definitive, well accepted
design pattern for that.

         

        Does any of you know of one?

         

        Thx.

[Desilets, Alain]

The idea of a closed eye has been suggested by a number of my test
subjects. I haven't had a chance to test it yet, but my guess is that it
will suffer from the same issue.

Does a closed eye mean
- Watches are currently OFF (and therefore, click here to turn them ON)
OR
- Click here to turn OFF the watches (and therefore, they are currently
ON)

But it's worth a try.

-----Original Message-----
From: agile-usability@...
[mailto:agile-usability@...] On Behalf Of marjoriepries
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:44 PM
To: agile-usability@...
Subject: [agile-usability] Re: Designing toggle icon


The problem seems to be in depending on the color to convey the meaning
while the eye is static. Maybe if you tried a closed eye vs. an open eye
and forgot about the colored checkmarks completely, then.

the idea of a ligthhouse with a signal beam vs. one without also came to
my mind.

Marjorie


--- In agile-usability@..., "Desilets, Alain"
<alain.desilets@...> wrote:
>

>  
>
> The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up with,
some
> people interpret it as  representing the STATE of the watches, and
some
> people interpret it as the ACTION that will be done on the state of
the
> watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these two
interpretations

> tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye with a green
> checkmark can be interpreted as:
>
>  
>
> -          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them OFF)
>
> OR
>
> -          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are
> currently OFF)
>
>  
>
> Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list of

icons
> in the attached MS Word file with a dozen people or so, and I find
this
> contradiction applies with all of them.
>
>  
> Thx.
>




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Larry Constantine]

Alain,

 

Indeed, this is a generic problem for which there is no single best solution. It depends.
But my own research shows that people who interpret the label on a toggle button to mean
the command to be executed (rather than the current state) are in the majority. However,
labels on function buttons that change are problematic in any case. (Although, I have used
them on rare and carefully reasoned occasion.)

 

Here are the options that my work suggests work best, on average (your mileage may vary):

 

(a)     have a button with an unchanging label (the on-state) that appears depressed (or
on) when selected

(b)    have two buttons (watches on, watches off) linked visually and in behavior

(c)     use a check box (e.g., [ ] Watches on)

 

On a Wiki, I would favor the latter as more in keeping with the Web-based interface; and
it's simpler.

 

--Larry Constantine

 

  _____  

From: agile-usability@... [mailto:agile-usability@...] On Behalf
Of Desilets, Alain
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:20 PM
To: agile-usability@...
Subject: [agile-usability] Designing toggle icon [1 Attachment]

 

 

[Attachment(s) from Desilets, Alain included below]




I know this is a general UI design issue, but I am asking here because I know many of you
folks personally to be a friendly and helpful bunch. But please feel free to tell me to
post this somewhere else (and if so, what list you recommend).

 

I need to design a clickable icon for use on a wiki system, which will toggle watches on
and off. When watches are on, the user receives email notification of every change made to
a page. If watches are off, he doesn't.

 

The problem I am having is that no matter what icon I come up with, some people interpret
it as  representing the STATE of the watches, and some people interpret it as the ACTION
that will be done on the state of the watches when they click on it. Unfortunately, these
two interpretations tend to contradict each other. For example, an eye with a green
checkmark can be interpreted as:

 

-          Traces are ON (and therefore, click here to turn them OFF)

OR

-          Click here to turn traces ON (and therefore, they are currently OFF)

 

Which are exact opposite of each other. I have tested the list of icons in the attached MS
Word file with a dozen people or so, and I find this contradiction applies with all of
them.

 

This seems to be a common problem, for example, see:

 

   http://www.ixda. <http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=11512>
org/discuss.php?post=11512

 

yet, I haven't been able to find a definitive, well accepted design pattern for that.

 

Does any of you know of one?

 

Thx.

[Desilets, Alain]

> Indeed, this is a generic problem for which there is no single best
solution. It depends. But my own research shows
> that people who interpret the label on a toggle button to mean the
command to be executed (rather than the current
> state) are in the majority. However, labels on function buttons that
change are problematic in any case. (Although, I
> have used them on rare and carefully reasoned occasion.)

Thx for answering Larry. Nice to get advice from a guru ;-).

The wiki engine in question (TikiWiki) currently uses that approach
(icon on the button suggests the action that will happen when you click
on it). But we are seeing that a good 50% of users are confused by it
and interpret it in terms of state.

When I tested the 8 icons in my previous email with 12 subjects or so, I
asked half of them what the icon suggested in terms of state, and asked
the other half what it suggested in terms of the action that would
happen.

I found that when people described their understanding of the state,
they were unanimous. But those who were asked to describe what action
would happen tended to split 50-50 between turn off and turn on.

This may be tied to the specific icons I tested, but it might be a hint
that it's easier to clearly convey a state than an action.

This seems to argue for using the icon to convey  state, not action...
dunno.

> Here are the options that my work suggests work best, on average (your
mileage may vary):
>
> (a) have a button with an unchanging label (the on-state) that appears
depressed (or on) when selected

So, an eye button that appears depressed or not. Sounds like a good
idea.

Can you provide an example of what such a button looks like?

> (b) have two buttons (watches on, watches off) linked visually and in
behavior

Hum... don't like that. The reason we are going with icons is that we
have a real estate crunch.

> (c) use a check box (e.g., [ ] Watches on)
> On a Wiki, I would favor the latter as more in keeping with the
Web-based interface; and it's simpler.

Unfortunately, that button is part of a toolbar that's all made up of
icons, so I want to keep it that way for consistency.

One idea I had was the following...

Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
"off".

To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
would see a popup menu with the following two items:

- On
- Off

And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
the current state.

A bit complex, but might work. I like the depressed button idea too.

[Larry Constantine]

Alain said:

 

One idea I had was the following...

Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
"off".

To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
would see a popup menu with the following two items:

- On
- Off

And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
the current state.

A bit complex, but might work.

 

 

Yes, complex. Okay, if you must have it as a tool and have limited real estate, I would go
with the toggle button, suggestion (a), or another weirder but still effective hybrid that
I have used on occasion: the check button.

 

In attached image are concept mockups of the 2 designs, the straight toggle button and the
check button shown in off (left) and on (right) states. The latter is the least ambiguous,
but both rely on instructive interaction, that is, the user knows how they work after
using (clicking) once.

 

Good luck!

 

--Larry Constantine

 

 

  _____  

From: agile-usability@... [mailto:agile-usability@...] On Behalf
Of Desilets, Alain
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:05 PM
To: agile-usability@...
Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Designing toggle icon

 

 

> Indeed, this is a generic problem for which there is no single best
solution. It depends. But my own research shows
> that people who interpret the label on a toggle button to mean the
command to be executed (rather than the current
> state) are in the majority. However, labels on function buttons that
change are problematic in any case. (Although, I
> have used them on rare and carefully reasoned occasion.)

Thx for answering Larry. Nice to get advice from a guru ;-).

The wiki engine in question (TikiWiki) currently uses that approach
(icon on the button suggests the action that will happen when you click
on it). But we are seeing that a good 50% of users are confused by it
and interpret it in terms of state.

When I tested the 8 icons in my previous email with 12 subjects or so, I
asked half of them what the icon suggested in terms of state, and asked
the other half what it suggested in terms of the action that would
happen.

I found that when people described their understanding of the state,
they were unanimous. But those who were asked to describe what action
would happen tended to split 50-50 between turn off and turn on.

This may be tied to the specific icons I tested, but it might be a hint
that it's easier to clearly convey a state than an action.

This seems to argue for using the icon to convey state, not action...
dunno.

> Here are the options that my work suggests work best, on average (your
mileage may vary):
>
> (a) have a button with an unchanging label (the on-state) that appears
depressed (or on) when selected

So, an eye button that appears depressed or not. Sounds like a good
idea.

Can you provide an example of what such a button looks like?

> (b) have two buttons (watches on, watches off) linked visually and in
behavior

Hum... don't like that. The reason we are going with icons is that we
have a real estate crunch.

> (c) use a check box (e.g., [ ] Watches on)
> On a Wiki, I would favor the latter as more in keeping with the
Web-based interface; and it's simpler.

Unfortunately, that button is part of a toolbar that's all made up of
icons, so I want to keep it that way for consistency.

One idea I had was the following...

Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
"off".

To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
would see a popup menu with the following two items:

- On
- Off

And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
the current state.

A bit complex, but might work. I like the depressed button idea too.

[Scott Preece-2]

Or, use an icon to show state and just use a popup dialog to indicate what happened as a result of clicking it (e.g., "Now watching page"). For a non-destructive operation like this, that should be OK. I would prefer a timed dialog or one that would go away as soon as you move your mouse away from the button, rather than requiring an extra click.

Alternatively, you could use a mouseover popup to indicate what the action associated with the button is.

scott

--- In agile-usability@..., "Larry Constantine" <lconstantine@...> wrote:

>
> Alain said:
>
>  
>
> One idea I had was the following...
>
> Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
> state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
> For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
> "off".
>
> To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
> would see a popup menu with the following two items:
>
> - On
> - Off
>
> And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
> the current state.
>
> A bit complex, but might work.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Yes, complex. Okay, if you must have it as a tool and have limited real estate, I would go
> with the toggle button, suggestion (a), or another weirder but still effective hybrid that
> I have used on occasion: the check button.
>
>  
>
> In attached image are concept mockups of the 2 designs, the straight toggle button and the
> check button shown in off (left) and on (right) states. The latter is the least ambiguous,
> but both rely on instructive interaction, that is, the user knows how they work after
> using (clicking) once.
>
>  
>
> Good luck!
>
>  
>
> --Larry Constantine
>
>  
>
>  
>
>   _____  
>
> From: agile-usability@... [mailto:agile-usability@...] On Behalf
> Of Desilets, Alain
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:05 PM
> To: agile-usability@...
> Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Designing toggle icon
>
>  
>
>  
>
> > Indeed, this is a generic problem for which there is no single best
> solution. It depends. But my own research shows
> > that people who interpret the label on a toggle button to mean the
> command to be executed (rather than the current
> > state) are in the majority. However, labels on function buttons that
> change are problematic in any case. (Although, I
> > have used them on rare and carefully reasoned occasion.)
>
> Thx for answering Larry. Nice to get advice from a guru ;-).
>
> The wiki engine in question (TikiWiki) currently uses that approach
> (icon on the button suggests the action that will happen when you click
> on it). But we are seeing that a good 50% of users are confused by it
> and interpret it in terms of state.
>
> When I tested the 8 icons in my previous email with 12 subjects or so, I
> asked half of them what the icon suggested in terms of state, and asked
> the other half what it suggested in terms of the action that would
> happen.
>
> I found that when people described their understanding of the state,
> they were unanimous. But those who were asked to describe what action
> would happen tended to split 50-50 between turn off and turn on.
>
> This may be tied to the specific icons I tested, but it might be a hint
> that it's easier to clearly convey a state than an action.
>
> This seems to argue for using the icon to convey state, not action...
> dunno.
>
> > Here are the options that my work suggests work best, on average (your
> mileage may vary):
> >
> > (a) have a button with an unchanging label (the on-state) that appears
> depressed (or on) when selected
>
> So, an eye button that appears depressed or not. Sounds like a good
> idea.
>
> Can you provide an example of what such a button looks like?
>
> > (b) have two buttons (watches on, watches off) linked visually and in
> behavior
>
> Hum... don't like that. The reason we are going with icons is that we
> have a real estate crunch.
>
> > (c) use a check box (e.g., [ ] Watches on)
> > On a Wiki, I would favor the latter as more in keeping with the
> Web-based interface; and it's simpler.
>
> Unfortunately, that button is part of a toolbar that's all made up of
> icons, so I want to keep it that way for consistency.
>
> One idea I had was the following...
>
> Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
> state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
> For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
> "off".
>
> To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
> would see a popup menu with the following two items:
>
> - On
> - Off
>
> And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
> the current state.
>
> A bit complex, but might work. I like the depressed button idea too.
>

[Tim Wright-3]

Perhaps the problem is that you're trying to use one widget to convey two
pieces of information - state and action. Something like this might be
better:

You are watching this page. *Stop watching*.

Tim

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 8:48 AM, scott preece <sepreece@...> wrote:

>
>
> Or, use an icon to show state and just use a popup dialog to indicate what
> happened as a result of clicking it (e.g., "Now watching page"). For a
> non-destructive operation like this, that should be OK. I would prefer a
> timed dialog or one that would go away as soon as you move your mouse away
> from the button, rather than requiring an extra click.
>
> Alternatively, you could use a mouseover popup to indicate what the action
> associated with the button is.
>
> scott
>
> --- In agile-usability@... <agile-usability%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Larry Constantine" <lconstantine@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Alain said:
> >
> >
> >
> > One idea I had was the following...
> >
> > Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
> > state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
> > For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
> > "off".
> >
> > To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
> > would see a popup menu with the following two items:
> >
> > - On
> > - Off
> >
> > And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
> > the current state.
> >
> > A bit complex, but might work.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, complex. Okay, if you must have it as a tool and have limited real
> estate, I would go
> > with the toggle button, suggestion (a), or another weirder but still
> effective hybrid that
> > I have used on occasion: the check button.
> >
> >
> >
> > In attached image are concept mockups of the 2 designs, the straight
> toggle button and the
> > check button shown in off (left) and on (right) states. The latter is the
> least ambiguous,
> > but both rely on instructive interaction, that is, the user knows how
> they work after
> > using (clicking) once.
> >
> >
> >
> > Good luck!
>
> >
> >
> >
> > --Larry Constantine
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: agile-usability@...<agile-usability%40yahoogroups.com>[mailto:
> agile-usability@... <agile-usability%40yahoogroups.com>] On
> Behalf
> > Of Desilets, Alain
> > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:05 PM
>
> > To: agile-usability@... <agile-usability%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Designing toggle icon
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Indeed, this is a generic problem for which there is no single best
> > solution. It depends. But my own research shows
> > > that people who interpret the label on a toggle button to mean the
> > command to be executed (rather than the current
> > > state) are in the majority. However, labels on function buttons that
> > change are problematic in any case. (Although, I
> > > have used them on rare and carefully reasoned occasion.)
> >
> > Thx for answering Larry. Nice to get advice from a guru ;-).
> >
> > The wiki engine in question (TikiWiki) currently uses that approach
> > (icon on the button suggests the action that will happen when you click
> > on it). But we are seeing that a good 50% of users are confused by it
> > and interpret it in terms of state.
> >
> > When I tested the 8 icons in my previous email with 12 subjects or so, I
> > asked half of them what the icon suggested in terms of state, and asked
> > the other half what it suggested in terms of the action that would
> > happen.
> >
> > I found that when people described their understanding of the state,
> > they were unanimous. But those who were asked to describe what action
> > would happen tended to split 50-50 between turn off and turn on.
> >
> > This may be tied to the specific icons I tested, but it might be a hint
> > that it's easier to clearly convey a state than an action.
> >
> > This seems to argue for using the icon to convey state, not action...
> > dunno.
> >
> > > Here are the options that my work suggests work best, on average (your
> > mileage may vary):
> > >
> > > (a) have a button with an unchanging label (the on-state) that appears
> > depressed (or on) when selected
> >
> > So, an eye button that appears depressed or not. Sounds like a good
> > idea.
> >
> > Can you provide an example of what such a button looks like?
> >
> > > (b) have two buttons (watches on, watches off) linked visually and in
> > behavior
> >
> > Hum... don't like that. The reason we are going with icons is that we
> > have a real estate crunch.
> >
> > > (c) use a check box (e.g., [ ] Watches on)
> > > On a Wiki, I would favor the latter as more in keeping with the
> > Web-based interface; and it's simpler.
> >
> > Unfortunately, that button is part of a toolbar that's all made up of
> > icons, so I want to keep it that way for consistency.
> >
> > One idea I had was the following...
> >
> > Use the icon to convey state, since people seem to agree more on what
> > state an icon refers to than on what action will result from pushing it.
> > For example, eye with green check for "on" and an eye with a red X for
> > "off".
> >
> > To convey action, use a popup menu. When the user clicks on the icon, he
> > would see a popup menu with the following two items:
> >
> > - On
> > - Off
> >
> > And there would be a checkmark in front of the one that corresponds to
> > the current state.
> >
> > A bit complex, but might work. I like the depressed button idea too.
> >
>
>  
>