Designers: Re: Inline Edit - clearing the field

Clay Fenlason clay.fenlason at
Tue Jun 24 13:59:10 UTC 2008

If the aim is to allow for tasks that clear fields, does that mean
there should be some sort of "delete" affordance built in?  I haven't
looked at recent mockups, but I don't recall if something like that
was there.  Going in and erasing-by-editing seems to involve an extra
step of cleverness that could be a nuisance if all you want to do is
wipe something away

Also, creating a new value where one didn't exist previously seems to
me a task rather different - I might call it "inline authoring"
instead.  The vast majority of cases, I would think, involve some
correction or revision of a value when there has either been a mistake
or a change of circumstances.

Which reminds me of some other examples where inline editing and
inline authoring are both related but distinct.  Take a look at the
creation of subtasks in JIRA, for example, or the To-Do widget in
NetVibes.  In both cases you can create a new row in a listing with a
kind of "add" mechanism which also looks and feels very similarly to
the inline editing.

Does that mean inline authoring should be part of this component, or
something different?


On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 1:55 AM, Allison Bloodworth
<abloodworth at> wrote:
> Hi Anastasia,
> As Daphne mentioned, we a bit talked about this issue in the design
> review on Friday. I'm going to put together some mock-ups with a
> message in the empty fields (in a manner similar to what Eli suggests)
> for the contexts where this makes sense (e.g. where there aren't going
> to be a ton of blank fields on a page--something we'll give advice
> about in the design pattern), but assume whether or not this text
> appears will be configurable by the designer/developer.
> I agree with you (and Eli) that there should be a min-width on empty
> fields so that the yellow background shows up on rollover. I'll
> specify this in the story cards.
> One other point we were discussing was the fact that when someone
> tries to clear a field that did have a value but *cannot* be empty,
> the user should receive some sort of error message (and the original
> data should probably be saved if the user doesn't enter anything new).
> This (Error Handling) is something that we plan to create storyboards
> for in a future iteration. If it's something you need soon, let us
> know and we'll move that task up in priority.
> Cheers,
> Allison
> On Jun 23, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Eli Cochran wrote:
>> I have two suggestions, the first is to have a minimum width. The
>> second is to put in default text into the space, such as "Click here
>> to edit", which gives the visual clue to the user that the space is
>> editable and also helps enforce the min width for browsers that don't
>> support min width very well.
>> Usually when this is done, the default text is displayed in a dimmed
>> and/or alternate font.
>> - Eli
>> On Jun 23, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Anastasia Cheetham wrote:
>>>> You'll see that even though the group field is empty the inline edit
>>>> discovery interaction of highlight and hover message apply.  For
>>>> now, the interaction you describe should probably work the same
>>>> way.  One of the challenges here is the varying contexts.  Sometimes
>>>> it is really important for an empty field to be empty (in a
>>>> particularly busy interface for instance or when there are lots of
>>>> empty values so textually describing the emptiness is huge clutter
>>>> and noise).  Other times it might not be bad to have a textual
>>>> indication that the field is empty.  In Friday's design review we
>>>> decided this was likely something controlled by the integrating
>>>> app.  Does that make sense?
>>> Daphne, thanks for your feedback.
>>> Currently, the highlight and hover behaviour is the same, regardless
>>> of whether or not the field is empty. The issue is that when the
>>> field
>>> is empty, it is very small, so that when you hover over it, for
>>> example, the yellow highlight is a very small area, and easy to miss
>>> (and probably hard to target).
>>> I notice that when you do click on it, the editable field defaults to
>>> a minimum width that is larger than the empty field - if the hover
>>> highlight were styled to also have this minimum width, might that
>>> address the usability issue?
>>> --
>>> Anastasia Cheetham                   a.cheetham at
>>> Software Designer, Fluid Project
>>> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre / University of Toronto
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fluid-work mailing list
>>> fluid-work at
>> . . . . . . . . . . .  .  .   .    .      .         .              .                     .
>> Eli Cochran
>> user interaction developer
>> ETS, UC Berkeley
>> _______________________________________________
>> fluid-work mailing list
>> fluid-work at
> Allison Bloodworth
> Senior User Interaction Designer
> Educational Technology Services
> University of California, Berkeley
> (415) 377-8243
> abloodworth at
> _______________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list
> fluid-work at

Clay Fenlason
Director, Educational Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology
(404) 385-6644

More information about the fluid-work mailing list