Unclutter (a.k.a. redesign) the 'Access control' tab [#836416]

I tried looking for any similar issues before posting this one, but then again I might have not used the right search terms. So, I apologize in advance if this turns to be a duplicate...

I think that the way the 'Access control' tab is laid out is kinda cluttered (same user roll appears at least 6 times, 3 for any content + 3 for own content). I thought it'd be better to show than tell, so here is what we see now:

View any content:        Edit any content:        Delete any content:
[ ] anonymous user       [ ] anonymous user       [ ] anonymous user
[ ] authenticated user   [ ] authenticated user   [ ] authenticated user
[ ] site owner           [ ] site owner           [ ] site owner

View own content:        Edit own content:        Delete own content:
[ ] anonymous user       [ ] anonymous user       [ ] anonymous user
[ ] authenticated user   [ ] authenticated user   [ ] authenticated user
[ ] site owner           [ ] site owner           [ ] site owner

... here's how I think it should be (stage 1):

                     View any content:   Edit any content:   Delete any content:
anonymous user              [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]
authenticated user          [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]
site owner                  [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]

                     View own content:   Edit own content:   Delete own content:
anonymous user              [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]
authenticated user          [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]
site owner                  [ ]                 [ ]                   [ ]

... and how it should finally get (stage 2):

                     Any [content-type-name-here] access
=====================================================================
                     View:   Edit:   Delete:   Create:   Full access:
anonymous user        [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]
authenticated user    [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]
site owner            [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]

                     Own [content-type-name-here] access
=====================================================================
                     View:   Edit:   Delete:   Create:   Full access:
anonymous user        [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]
authenticated user    [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]
site owner            [ ]     [ ]      [ ]       [ ]         [ ]

The 'Create' column in the last mockup is for when this gets implemented: #789754: Add 'create' Content Access operations support and the 'Full access' needs its own feature request ;)

I would like to know what people think. Thanx in advance for considering this.

Comments

Comment #1

salvis

he/his

CreditAttribution: salvis commented 24 June 2010 at 21:37

Nice, I may actually borrow your idea for FA...

A possible downside could be that it may be less accessible to people with disabilities. It would probably require using the title attribute to describe each checkbox, and this would make it harder to provide additional information (e.g. why a checkbox might be disabled).

Comment #2

klonos

he/him

English

90% Melbourne, Australia - 10% Larissa, Greece

CreditAttribution: klonos commented 25 June 2010 at 00:35

Well, I haven't used any drupal forum feature till now, nor any forum-related module. So I have no idea what the Forum Access module does (GUI-wise I mean). I am glad you find my idea useful though ;)

I am not sure I understand what you mean by

...this would make it harder to provide additional information

...Harder than what?

I am not sure what you mean by

why a checkbox might be disabled

either. How is that information provided/presented now? Are you referring to Content Access or to Forum Access perhaps?

Comment #3

salvis

he/his

CreditAttribution: salvis commented 25 June 2010 at 07:53

Both modules disable some of the checkboxes — e.g. roles that have the 'administer nodes' permission cannot be kept out, so the checkboxes are checked and disabled. CA displays the mouse-over hint "This role has 'administer nodes' permission, so access is granted." in this case.

If the 'additional information' applies to the entire row, then it's no problem, but at least FA has some additional special cases that apply only to one of the checkboxes, not to the entire row. It emphasizes (italicizes) the corresponding checkbox labels to alert the user that there's something special, and hovering over those labels then provides the additional information. Maybe an 'information' icon would do the job, but I'm not sure how to insert that into a table cell.

Comment #4

klonos

he/him

English

90% Melbourne, Australia - 10% Larissa, Greece

CreditAttribution: klonos commented 25 June 2010 at 12:31

Aha! I see what you mean now! When you mention 'disabled' checkboxes, you actually mean 'locked' enabled checkboxes. Right?

... as for the popup on hover over the label -I admit that I haven't tried this before, but after googling it a bit..- it turns you can use a title="message" attribute like so:

<input type="checkbox" name="some option" value="option" title="hello!" />

Just checked it and it works fine in both ie8 and fx3 ;)

Comment #5

klonos

he/him

English

90% Melbourne, Australia - 10% Larissa, Greece

CreditAttribution: klonos commented 25 June 2010 at 12:33

... so I guess it is safe to omit the labels or alternatively turn them into hover titles (a.k.a. popups).

Comment #6

salvis

he/his

CreditAttribution: salvis commented 26 June 2010 at 10:25

There are three properties related to checkboxes: visible, enabled, and checked. 'Disabled' is the opposite of 'enabled', meaning whether the user can change the checked state or not. 'Disabled' is typically rendered as 'grayed', although 'grayed' can be a third state in so-called three-state checkboxes. The checkbox can be checked or unchecked (programmatically), regardless of whether it's enabled or not.

Yes, adding a title attribute should work, but we can't, say, make the checkbox italic, to alert the user to the fact that it might be worth hovering over the checkbox to see what information is hidden in the title attribute.

Comment #7

klonos

he/him

English

90% Melbourne, Australia - 10% Larissa, Greece

CreditAttribution: klonos commented 27 June 2010 at 19:05

Ok, fair enough and a good point as well. How about adding a '*' next to any checkbox with some message worth hovering over? Like so: [ ] (*)

I think this still remains compact enough and since the '*' can be bold and/or of any color, it can give some emphasis. The only drawback I can think of is that the '*' might be confused with the 'required' mark next to some such fields, but then again it can be a '!' (...or whatever) instead of a '*'.

Comment #8

salvis

he/his

CreditAttribution: salvis commented 27 June 2010 at 19:19

The downside of adding a character (or an icon) is that you can't center-align the checkboxes anymore. If they are to line up, you'll have to left-align them and that's not ideal either.

This is not a killer issue, just an inconvenience with no satisfying solution (that I'm aware of).

Comment #9

klonos

he/him

English

90% Melbourne, Australia - 10% Larissa, Greece

CreditAttribution: klonos commented 27 June 2010 at 21:24

...I guess -as a workaround- you can place checkboxes and their respective icons in separate columns. That would allow center-alignment both for checkboxes as well as for icons, right?