4 Replies Latest reply on Oct 3, 2012 2:38 PM by AppNomad

    FileMaker - Interface Language Refactoring

    sheldon

      Like any other major and complex software product, FileMaker has gone through numerous changes and updates.

       

      One thing that seems to persist, and which I still find counter-intuitive after 20 years of use (yikes!), are the double-negative checkboxes - those which will suppress functionality or override expected results by not doing something. They face the user with a choice to say "yes" to mean "no."

       

      Two examples would be:

       

      [ ] Don't Display in Open File Dialog

       

      ... instead of ...

       

      [X] Display in Open File Dlalog

       

      - and -

       

      [ ] Do Not Evaluate If All Referenced Fields Are Empty

       

      ... instead of ...

       

      [X] Always Evaluate

       

      Are there any processes in place in UX or Development to try and resolve these long-standing interface and linguistic inconsistencies that can be confusing for experienced and novice users alike?

        • 1. Re: FileMaker - Interface Language Refactoring
          jrenfrew

          Do I answer this question yes or no??

          • 2. Re: FileMaker - Interface Language Refactoring
            steve_ssh

            [ ] Don't Display in Open File Dialog

             

            ... instead of ...

             

            [X] Display in Open File Dlalog

             

            - and -

             

            [ ] Do Not Evaluate If All Referenced Fields Are Empty

             

            ... instead of ...

             

            [X] Always Evaluate

             

            This could not be less unclear.

             

             

            • 3. Re: FileMaker - Interface Language Refactoring
              mark_scott

              Agreed!  There's just that small, but perceptible, bit of extra cognitive energy needed to make sure you set your options correctly whenever you encounter this sort of thing.


              Also, sometimes a setting is worded one way in one place, but the obverse in another.  For example:


                   "Not empty" (in the Field Options dialog) becomes "Required Value" (in the Options column of the Manage Database dialog).


              OK, I can deal with that (although I'd prefer both places read "Required Value"), as, at least here, the checked state represents the assignment of the validation rule — the affirmative state.


              But it gets worse!  Consider:


                   "Do not replace existing value of field (if any)"


              First, the checked state is (arguably) the default/expected behavior, and the unchecked is the override behavior.


              Furthermore, if checked, then no comment is displayed in the Options column of the Manage Database dialog, but if UNchecked, we get:


                   "Auto-enter Calculation replaces existing value" displayed in the Options column.  Arggh!


              Did I say that right?  My head hurts every time I have to parse the meanings of those two statements to make sure I've set my auto-enter options correctly!    

              • 4. Re: FileMaker - Interface Language Refactoring
                AppNomad

                Don't I answer this question? yes or no