{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893/events","html_url":"https://github.com/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893","id":157422373,"number":3893,"title":"V8 proposal regarding new interface design","user":{"login":"Mesuva","id":1079600,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1079600?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva","html_url":"https://github.com/Mesuva","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesuva/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":4,"created_at":"2016-05-30T02:44:07Z","updated_at":"2016-05-31T21:11:18Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Hi all,\r\n\r\nI've had a look at the most recent development branch of v8 on github, taking note of both the styling changes and backwards compatibility.\r\n\r\nAt this point I'm still not seeing the benefits from the rework of the form styling. I've put screens side-by-side with 5.7 and have tried to be as objective as possible, but I'm only finding the v8 version harder to visually scan over. The contrast of the fields in particular is uncomfortable and the forms are really just longer without being easier/cleaner to use. \r\n\r\nI have read Franz's blog post and feedback as to the thinking behind the way forms should be handled - I'm not completely dismissive of the ideas, but I don't believe that this wholesale change is working, nor do I feel it is solving a problem concrete5 currently has. In particular, the concept of separating individual form items with a divider may help a little in some contexts, but it's really not improving things when applied everywhere.\r\n\r\nSomething like a field divider is an item that should be judiciously added by the individual developer creating a form. Sometimes forms need extra fieldsets, sometimes forms need dividers, sometimes they need to be completely re-ordered, but all these decisions are ones that a good user interface developer will think through and apply specifically to make their form as usable as possible. Adding this line in by default is really making the assumption that it should always be there - it's pushing a layout and style that isn't always the best fit.\r\n\r\nOn a more technical level, a concern is that this kind of styling makes the CMS less attractive to new developers who are already familiar with creating interfaces with Bootstrap. Some interfaces that have been created with 'correct' bootstrap HTML/class markup aren't going to necessarily work.\r\n\r\nFor example on some existing interfaces I've tested out the lines are pushing out into the wrong columns due to negative margins due to code like this:\r\n\r\ndiv#ccm-dashboard-content>form div.form-group {\r\n    padding-left: 97px;\r\n    padding-right: 50px;\r\n    margin-left: -97px;\r\n    margin-right: -50px;\r\n}\r\n\r\nWhat such code is expecting is that a form-group is never in a column. In existing interfaces that are coded correctly as per fairly vanilla bootstrap styling, this kind of thing happens:\r\n\r\n![screen shot 2016-05-30 at 10 16 51 am](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1079600/15638410/60be4b78-265f-11e6-9743-8e8b7410f2de.png)\r\n\r\nWhereas previously it looked like this without any custom styling:\r\n\r\n![screen shot 2016-05-30 at 10 17 01 am](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1079600/15638412/639d957e-265f-11e6-9730-453fc1dd1d37.png)\r\n\r\nFrom what I've read I believe a class has been added to be able to turn off the lines, but with the other styling changes in place this is really just making bootstrap forms worse. I'm sure no-one would have any issues with there being tweaks to the bootstrap styling to make it more uniquely concrete5's, but these kinds of broader form changes are effectively breaking the benefits of using bootstrap.\r\n\r\nI do respect that there is a drive here to continue to improve things, but my big concern is this feels like more of an experiment, rather than an obvious improvement. I think such a visual rework should be done in mockups and other branches, where there can be a lot of feedback from experienced users and interface designers, rather than directly in the development branch.\r\n\r\nGetting to the proposal - version 8 is being described as being backwards compatible, but the attribute rework alone is already creating lots of concerns. A little bit of required reworking here and there isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when combined with the potential re-work of lots of user interfaces, especially when there's no obvious improvement, it is going to be too much in the same upgrade cycle.\r\n\r\nSo my proposal is: can we revert in v8 the interface back to the 5.7 version (at least in terms of the broader form changes), so developers have a more gradual transition to v8?  \r\n\r\nI'm not saying these kind of interface changes should never be attempted, but could they be done in a separate major upgrade, one where we can tap into the broader experience of all the developers and designers?\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/comments/222822027","html_url":"https://github.com/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893#issuecomment-222822027","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/concrete5/concrete5/issues/3893","id":222822027,"user":{"login":"szsori","id":1100694,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1100694?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori","html_url":"https://github.com/szsori","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/szsori/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-05-31T21:11:18Z","updated_at":"2016-05-31T21:11:18Z","body":"So, I haven't been involved a lot with previous development, but I did have a strong opinion about the UI in 5.7 and also have a strong opinion about this.  You posed the question about whether we prefer 5.6 over 5.7, and I'd have to say that from a usability perspective 5.6 still has an advantage over 5.7.  That's not to say it looks nicer or performs better, but to me it's absolutely more intuitive because things are made so obvious.  My approach to UI is always that users are stupid, so the more blatantly obvious you can make things, the better.\r\n\r\nI bring that up because I feel like this change is similar.  Will people figure it out and get used to it?  Sure, but my primary selling point for c5 is telling people it's intuitive and that they'll be more comfortable with it in less time than other systems.  I think this change makes forms less intuitive for the sole purpose of reducing the complexity what's displayed, but perhaps that could have been done in other ways?\r\n\r\nI'm concerned that you feel like the way you're handling attributes works best globally instead of deferring to the developer to make that decision.  Sure, we can do a template override if we disagree, but in the past we've been free to lay things out as we want without having to worry that your decisions would force us to revisit the work we've already completed.  Additionally, if this approach is considered best practice for simplifying forms, then why isn't it also being applied to the form block for end users?  Wouldn't the logic that applies on the backend also hold true for the frontend?  Not that I want that to happen, but I hope to understand the decision.\r\n\r\nAnyway, my specific concerns are that I'm going to have to review every form that I've made in 5.7 to make sure they function correctly and remain usable.  I'm worried about how I'll convince my clients that they need to pay for that time, considering we promised them that version updates from 5.7 forward will be seamless.  I'm even more worried that if I ever need a more complex form layout (are dividers now considered complex?) that I have to do a template override.  And toeing the line of what's acceptable, I'm worried that fixing non-existent problems is delaying a true ecommerce solution (which has resulted in me having to sell 4 Magento sites over the last month - Bleh).\r\n\r\nI mean no disrespect.  I love c5, love many changes you've made lately (I peed myself when express objects were announced), and think you guys (and Jess) are rockstars.  This just concerns me in the same way the 5.7 frontend UI and the 5.7 marketplace decisions concerned me, and felt I needed to say something."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"szsori"}}