Re: Conlang Flag: Voting

Emaelivpeith Adrian Morgan:
> All feedback gratefully received. Try submitting both valid votes and
> invalid votes, and see if you think the form responds appropriately
> and informatively.
General display-related comments:

1. The giant single-row table is annoying. This is mostly that I
strongly dislike horizontal scrolling anywhere. I would suggest
including only variations of a design on the same row.

2. In the text field section, you refer to the flags by numerals. In
the flag section, you refer to them by letters. Oops? :) It looks like
it's really supposed to be letters, since entering numbers as my
choices is an "invalid identification code."

3. It *might* be a good idea to include a "Comments" text field with
each preference indication, so that we have more opinions to work with
when we get to the second stage of voting on the specific variation of
the winning flag. The downside is that we would have more opinions to
deal with. ;) But for example, I would use this to state that I prefer
flag B to A, but I prefer B-with-gold-line to B-as-is.

4. To lessen the chance of invalid data entry, you could change the
text fields to drop-down menus. To be even slicker, you could remove
all already-voted-for entries from the remaining menus as the user
votes, but that would require JavaScript perhaps? (I'm starting to
code up some JavaScript that would do this. I'll let you know the URL
when I'm done.)

5. As for presentation of the flag graphics themselves, I think the
table should have more cellpadding, so that flags in adjacent cells
don't run into each other. This is especially apparent with flags L,
M, and N.

6. Also WRT the graphics, resizing *all* of the to a standard size
would probably be a good idea, just for fairness of comparison's sake.


Voting script-related comments:

7. If you enter invalid data into the form and submit it, it displays
the errant items in reverse order -- that is, preference 24, then 23,
then 22, etc, with preference 1 at the bottom of the list.

8. You cannot have blank entries between otherwise valid entries. I
don't know how often people would be doing that, but perhaps it might
be common enough that users miss one entry that it would be worthwhile
for you to just ignore all blank entries. (Note that if you do support
blank entries, don't forget that if the next non-blank entry is "equal
in preference" to the "previous" entry, that means the previous
non-blank entry, not "thisEntry - 1".)

Thanks for volunteering to be in charge of the voting! :)


--
AA