Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Editor: more compact Share design #1743

Closed
designsimply opened this issue Dec 17, 2015 · 3 comments
Closed

Editor: more compact Share design #1743

designsimply opened this issue Dec 17, 2015 · 3 comments
Labels
[Closed] Won't Fix No intention to address issue. [Feature] Post/Page Editor The editor for editing posts and pages. [Type] Enhancement Changes to an existing feature — removing, adding, or changing parts of it

Comments

@designsimply
Copy link
Contributor

Raised by @folletto

Given yesterday's discussion, here's a more compact "Share" panel design concept:

Short:
iconized-alt-2

Even shorter:
iconized-alt-short

Two considerations:

  1. In the future we might show the avatar used on the service (ht @mtias)
  2. The more compact version lacks an indication if "Facebook User" vs "Facebook Page". Not sure if it's super important tho, and we can compensate with a tooltip.

Note from @designsimply

Current:
screen shot 2015-12-17 at 13 07 22

Notes from @jkudish

A few notes/questions:

  • Why move the message to the top?
  • The message box lost some of it's extra UX, e.g. this:

screenshot from 2015-10-27 08-21-43

  • I think "Add new connection" should remain
  • I think the colors of the official icons stand out too much in an otherwise pretty uniform Editor, I'd prefer if we used social-logos as originally suggested by @kellychoffman
  • I like the FB page vs FB profile indicator 👍 -- it would require a small REST API change to accommodate as we don't currently return that info (though we have it)

Notes from @folletto

Why move the message to the top?

Because it's an existing pattern (open the box, get to write), and should be aligned with user intent. My hypothesis here is that users keep the checkbox most of the time in the same configuration (so they are changed once), and they instead edit the message. Just an hypothesis tho, can be swapped if it's falsified.

Also to note that with the exception of scheduled posts, I would find "Share" more useful post-post.

The message box lost some of it's extra UX, e.g. this:

It's a screenshot of what I was seeing this morning. We can reintroduce the counter without problem. Also would be great if the box would auto-expand vertically, making it even better in terms of vertical space. :)

I think "Add new connection" should remain

Whops. Sorry. That's right. It should, I removed it by error. The only suggestion of this mock is on how to handle the list, no other change.

I think the colors of the official icons stand out too much in an otherwise pretty uniform Editor

The icons should definitely be these. On the color, I think it makes the feature inherently clearer and glance-able, which is a huge plus. Since it's inside an accordion, I feel color is worth there. That said, I'd be ok also without color.

I like the FB page vs FB profile indicator

Cool! I wasn't sure about that. Thanks. :)

@designsimply designsimply added [Type] Enhancement Changes to an existing feature — removing, adding, or changing parts of it [Feature] Post/Page Editor The editor for editing posts and pages. labels Dec 17, 2015
@designsimply designsimply added this to the Editor: Future milestone Dec 17, 2015
@rachelmcr
Copy link
Member

The labels for each social media service are less prominent now (not bold) but otherwise the design hasn't much changed since this issue was raised. Current design:

screenshot 2017-12-22 14 58 55

#bug-scrub #pre-gutenburg-bug-purge

@worldomonation
Copy link
Contributor

worldomonation commented Jan 29, 2021

Hi! I'm triaging some older bugs on file as part of Quality Squad's efforts to cut down on issues.

Is this issue still applicable to wp-calypso as of 2021/01/29? From my brief testing I was unable to locate where this interface may be.

Would it be acceptable to close this issue with the status [Closed] - Won't Fix?

@folletto
Copy link
Contributor

This is still an interesting enhancement that surprisingly could still work... but given the time and the fact that at this point whoever wanted to improve it would have to work reviewing all the flows before getting here, it's ok to close it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Closed] Won't Fix No intention to address issue. [Feature] Post/Page Editor The editor for editing posts and pages. [Type] Enhancement Changes to an existing feature — removing, adding, or changing parts of it
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants