Permissions UI, latest experiment

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #30, on May 16th, 2013, 05:28 PM »
Hmm, yes, I can see what you mean.

So, deny permissions are needed, then.

* Arantor goes back to thinking.
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

spoogs

  • Posts: 417
Stick a fork in it SMF

live627

  • Should five per cent appear too small / Be thankful I don't take it all / 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman
  • Posts: 1,667
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #32, on May 17th, 2013, 12:13 AM »Last edited on May 17th, 2013, 12:25 AM
Quote from Arantor on May 16th, 2013, 03:35 PM
Given the feedback I've had here, that I've had on sm.org and the feedback I've had privately, I don't really see any point continuing with this, it's just proving to confuse people more than the messed up system we already had.
What, really? I see only one reason as to why they're confused[1] They are too used to the three radio buttons. It certainly makes sense from a developer's standpoint, but the average joe sixpack will see the "X" as superfluous.

How did Windows do it ever since the good old days of NT? Exactly as you propose to change it to, with the two checkboxes!

Follow your instincts. Do what's right. People will adapt and change their mindset.


...maybe some visual cue is called for here. Background colors, green fur allow (make it bluish green for the color blind[2]) and red for deny.
 1. I mean, come on guys, really?
 2. ever wonder why green  traffic light have a  blue hint?      So the color blind see blue, and not gray
A confident man keeps quiet.whereas a frightened man keeps talking, hiding his fear.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #33, on May 17th, 2013, 12:38 AM »
Yes, really. Most of the people I've spoken to are confused about the very existence of deny permissions because it's off by default. Thus permissions are a simple yes/no checkbox, not even the three radio buttons.

Thing is, even back to SMF 1.1.x, deny permissions are off by default so there is a whole heritage of 'it's just yes/no tickboxes' to deal with.

The reality, though, is that I haven't seen a single forum system doing it the way I proposed, they all do either yes/no or A/X/D triad (except XenForo in one specific circumstance but that's a battle for another day)[1]
Quote
It certainly makes sense from a developer's standpoint, but the average joe sixpack will see the "X" as superfluous.
Well, it all came about because of the very fact that Disallow and Deny seem awfully close together. Hell, even just renaming it to Yes/No/Never would be an improvement.

Yup, Windows did it the way proposed, and it was in fact a guy who does a decent amount of Windows sys-admin that suggested it to me (you know who you are), and it makes sense.

I tell you what though, my instincts on this are simply that *I* wasn't that convinced by it, which is why I posted it here under the label of 'experimental' because I'm not entirely convinced it's the way forward. It's *a* way forward, and the split is roughly 60/40 against judging by all the comments. It's probably better than what we have to an objective observer.

But I keep coming back to the objection Aaron raised - which comes down to the concept of form-follows-function. And he's right, even with UI hinting, even if I disable one checkbox when the other is ticked, it doesn't change the fact that it isn't what checkboxes are really for. It's not form following function.
Quote
make it bluish green for the color blind
Until you meet my mother who is blue-green colour blind ;)
 1. Specifically, they set up a default permission profile for boards that isn't tied to any one board, then each board is allow/disallow/deny/inherit from the default profile. But it's still radio buttons.

Farjo

  • "a valuable asset to the community"
  • Posts: 492
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #34, on May 20th, 2013, 02:35 AM »
"Question: if you can tick both allow and deny, which would logically take precedence? What would you expect it to do if you selected both?"
I would expect it to deny, as deny overrides all allows.

It's like a night club within which are many parties, all with their own invite list. If your name's on a list then you can get into the club. If your name is not on a list it means nothing - your name could be on a different list or it may be on none. However if you've been banned from the club then you won't get entry no matter how many lists your name's on.

So I agree with you getting rid of Disallow. Disallow is 1. not distinct enough to Deny to be clear and 2. misleading, because it doesn't disallow, it just doesn't allow. It's neutral, it does nothing.

"Well, it all came about because of the very fact that Disallow and Deny seem awfully close together. Hell, even just renaming it to Yes/No/Never would be an improvement."
Essentially what you have with your screen is Yes/Never/Neither - the latter being when both are unticked, and it's a truer representation of what's actually going on.

All your screen really needs is a good explanation at the top. And people who've never before seen Deny will assume it's new Wedge functionality :)

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #35, on May 31st, 2013, 05:45 PM »
Tell you one thing about the way IPB does its permissions - by separating permissions and groups the way it does, it reminds me of SimpleDesk and it sort of validates the concept of having roles vs groups.

godboko71

  • Fence accomplished!
  • Hello
  • Posts: 361
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #36, on June 1st, 2013, 07:10 AM »
Quote from Arantor on May 31st, 2013, 05:45 PM
Tell you one thing about the way IPB does its permissions - by separating permissions and groups the way it does, it reminds me of SimpleDesk and it sort of validates the concept of having roles vs groups.
Several CMS's do it that way as well.
Thank you,
Boko

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #37, on June 1st, 2013, 12:12 PM »
I think it's essentially encouraging me to go to town and not be too concerned about keeping compatibility in the converter.

godboko71

  • Fence accomplished!
  • Hello
  • Posts: 361
Re: Permissions UI, latest experiment
« Reply #38, on June 1st, 2013, 11:49 PM »
As long as the data is their does it really matter if we have to reset perms. Seems if one is moving to a new platform people should be expected to have to reset settings.