I thought that it’s impossible to misunderstand whether Reduced or Minimum would result in fewer reviews. I was wrong.
With this in mind, I propose the following change:
Normal = large button
Reduced = smaller button
Minimum = smallest button
3 Likes
An old adage given to me, years ago, for when explaining something to someone:
Try to imagine the most basic level of comprehension at which you think a human might function. Then, go down two
2 Likes
Discrete sliders instead of radio buttons might also be more obvious.
You would have to swap the order to Miniumum | Reduced | Normal so you do not have weird backwards sliders.
2 Likes
Sliders are more likely to make users agonize over every little tweak. Plus, for low values, we don’t want to show %, because due to some quirks of fuzz and scheduling, 0% doesn’t actually mean “0 due cards”.
1 Like
I meant the kind with discrete steps. There would still only be three options.
Trying to put the slider between two steps would just make it snap the the nearest step.
If you were feeling fancy you could try making a custom slider where the snap point for “minimum” is a little along the slider, not actually at zero.
Here is an example of the kind of slider I mean: React Slider component - Material UI
3 Likes
While it looks neat, I don’t think it is necessary. Also, it doesn’t solve the problem of users misunderstanding which button reduces the number of due cards more, which is what this topic is about.
1 Like
I feel it could reduce misunderstanding.
Shorter bar = fewer reviews
Longer bar = more reviews
Seems more obvious than standard radio buttons that do not implicitly represent ordered options.
Your suggestion of making the radio buttons different sizes also works. I was just trying to suggest alternatives to consider.
4 Likes
I think @rossgb is right. A slider will be better and not look ugly.
I think having tooltips would’ve been nice too.
Yeah, I guess that conveys the order better than buttons.
@dae I’m fine with both the suggestion above, by Luc, and my original suggestion (different button sizes), just please don’t ignore this.
EDIT: Slider easy day gui by Luc-Mcgrady · Pull Request #3605 · ankitects/anki · GitHub
I suggest reversing them to keep Normal → Reduced → Minimum the way it is right now
Like this:
This won’t confuse people who have already started using Easy Days and are already somewhat used to Normal → Reduced → Minimum.
3 Likes
I’m not a UI design expert, but I feel like reversed sliders is a big UI design no-no.
I cannot think of a time I have ever seen one before. It may cause even more confusion.
2 Likes
Here’s the pr. I’d agree its a little confusing swapping the direction that means “more” from before but so long as the filled bit of the bar shows the direction correctly I don’t know if it matters.
3 Likes
I think continuous/discrete sliders would make sense if users were allowed to choose a goal % (reduced from 100), but if you’re restricting people to classes then I think it should either be dropdowns or segmented buttons (a 3-state toggle), i.e.,
Monday <space> [ Normal | Reduced | Minimum ]
Tuesday <space> [ Normal | Reduced | Minimum ]
// etc
which is my personal preference (easier to use and reason with at a glance, better than an ugly grid of radio buttons).
Confusion regarding how each option affects number of reviews is easily rectified with an info button like all of the other sections, no?
1 Like
It seems to me that FireWater on Reddit in the image in the OP is asking about how much Reduced and Minimum are reduced specifically. (If so he understands that Minimum is less, but is asking specifically what percentage difference.) So in my opinion the problem of misunderstanding has not occurred and the UI change may not solve his problem.
Can you get rid of the table borders? I think it looks a bit ugly with that.
2 Likes
Out of curiosity (and also as a backup plan), do you think you can implement my original suggestion with button sizes?
