Page MenuHomePhabricator

Prompt user to enter instance name when disabling instance on Phacility
Open, WishlistPublic


GitHub and others use this UX pattern which is very effective at preventing people from operating on the wrong thing. Just add a text field to the confirmation dialog where the user needs to type the instance name.

Revisions and Commits

Event Timeline

swisspol raised the priority of this task from to Needs Triage.
swisspol updated the task description. (Show Details)
swisspol added a subscriber: swisspol.

This is the dialog you had trouble with, right?

I wouldn't say trouble, in the sense that I knew it was the confirmation dialog and I clearly understood how to use it ๐Ÿ˜‰

It's just that I genuinely thought I was logged in using my personal account which has a single test instance instead of my company account which has our single company instance. So it went pretty much like: there's only 1 instance on my personal account, no need to double-check I'm deleting the right one.

UX like this one where the user needs to re-enter the name of the object to delete are much better:

Also notice how the key stuff in the text is in bold and stands out.

The other problem with the current dialog is that the default action is the destructive one, so just pressing Return will accept the dialog, which you can easily do by mistake. Forcing the user to enter the instance would also address this problem.

epriestley added a revision: Restricted Differential Revision.Jul 20 2015, 12:08 AM
btrahan triaged this task as Wishlist priority.Jul 20 2015, 7:43 PM
btrahan added a subscriber: btrahan.

Merging in T8881 as its the same business problem here - a user blew through this dialog and we can do a slightly better job forcing them to read things.

I think having to type in the confirmation text is reasonable. Otherwise, while implementing, feel free to think through the surrounding workflow a bit if it could be even better at presenting the user with clear information.

Setting to wishlist as pragmatically speaking this issue has been quite rare to occur. This is a good potential task for a trusted contributor of little things such as an intern, but otherwise won't be prioritized by the core team barring more demonstrated user confusion.