From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: adam@irvine.com Subject: Re: Software landmines (loops) Date: 1998/09/08 Message-ID: <6t3use$5la$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 389094577 References: <902934874.2099.0.nnrp-10.c246a717@news.demon.co.uk> <6r1glm$bvh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6r9f8h$jtm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6renh8$ga7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rf59b$2ud$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rfra4$rul$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <6sbuod$fra$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35f51e53.48044143@ <904556531.666222@miso.it.uq.edu.au> <6sf87j$47n$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sh6ic$o8p$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6shhcq$lid$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sk59r$8e6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6ske0c$16k$1@hirame.wwa.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x5.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 192.160.8.44 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Sep 08 19:00:30 1998 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.18 i586) Date: 1998-09-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , "Rick Smith" wrote: > 1. No user should be required to enter more data than is necessary. If the > correct 4 digit year can be determined by the last two digits, do not ask > for more than these 2 digits. Well, just to be nitpicky: Does this mean that if the window of reasonable dates is small enough, the user should only be asked for 1 digit, because the correct 4-digit year could be determined from just the last digit and because "we should never ask the user for more data than is necessary"? I don't think the "minimum amount of data necessary" philosophy makes any sense here. Rather, I think the legitimate reason here is that if users have been entering 2-digit years all along, it might make sense to keep the user interface the way it is. (I'm assuming we're talking about data entry people or other users who have been using the application for a while and have gotten accustomed to it.) However, if, in the same application, there are some places where 2 digits are sufficient and other places where it isn't (and thus 4 digits are "necessary"---unless you want to say that only the last 3 digits should be sufficient! :)) I'd personally prefer all the years to be 4 digits. As a user, I would much rather have consistency than an overzealous attempt at "allowing me to enter just the minimum amount of data I have to". The latter would actually make things less efficient, since I'd have to look at the screen and think about whether I need to type in 2 or 4 digits, instead of just automatically entering a 4-digit year every time. Of course, non-touch typists (and I mean those of you who have to hunt for the 9 key *twice* when entering the year 1998) may see things differently. -- Adam -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum