I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct permission to use them.
I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks,
Walden
Foreman has a mix of styles, but I think generally on index pages we
hide buttons and links that the user doesn't have permissions to access.
A few pages such as host#show will disable buttons for console/power
etc that the user doesn't have permission for.
(link_to_if_authorized versus display_link_if_authorized helper)
···
On 13/06/14 19:56, Walden Raines wrote:
> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct permission to use them.
>
> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
>
> What are your thoughts?
–
Dominic Cleal
Red Hat Engineering
Thinking ahead, I'd like a way to hide UI completely when I begin re-implementing headpin (foretello just for Red Hat subscription management). I would suggest that permission based elements be hidden.
···
----- Original Message -----
> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo
> (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all
> preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct
> permission to use them.
>
> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are
> additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then
> contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
>
> What are your thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Walden
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
On the other hand, people will see all links and buttons even if they will
never have access to use them. User interface then seems unclear and hard to
use. I'd vote for hiding.
···
On Friday 13 of June 2014 14:56:30 Walden Raines wrote:
> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo
> (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all
> preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct
> permission to use them.
>
> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are
> additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then
> contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are
> needed.
>
> What are your thoughts?
–
Marek
Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
– bk
···
On 06/16/2014 03:20 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> On 13/06/14 19:56, Walden Raines wrote:
>> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct permission to use them.
>>
>> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
>>
>> What are your thoughts?
>
> Foreman has a mix of styles, but I think generally on index pages we
> hide buttons and links that the user doesn't have permissions to access.
> A few pages such as host#show will disable buttons for console/power
> etc that the user doesn't have permission for.
>
> (link_to_if_authorized versus display_link_if_authorized helper)
>
> Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
That's not really possible as this is Bastion javascript and html we are talking about here.
> On the other hand, people will see all links and buttons even if they will
> never have access to use them. User interface then seems unclear and hard to
> use. I'd vote for hiding.
That's true, and fewer choices is generally better in UI design. Especially if you can't actually choose some of the choices.
I'll go with hidden unless there are any objections.
Cheers,
Walden
···
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Kearney"
To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 7:18:33 AM
Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Katello: disabled vs readonly buttons
On 06/16/2014 03:20 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
On 13/06/14 19:56, Walden Raines wrote:
I’m working on making the UI reflect a user’s permissions in Katllo (Fixes #5503/BZ1102315 - restrict UI interactions to actual permissions in Bastion. by waldenraines · Pull Request #4226 · Katello/katello · GitHub). I was wondering if y’all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn’t have the correct permission to use them.
I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
What are your thoughts?
Foreman has a mix of styles, but I think generally on index pages we
hide buttons and links that the user doesn’t have permissions to access.
A few pages such as host#show will disable buttons for console/power
etc that the user doesn’t have permission for.
(link_to_if_authorized versus display_link_if_authorized helper)
Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
– bk
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
+1 from me. Why clutter the UI with things the user may or may not ever
be able to do. For people who are always read only you have greatly
simplified the interface to just the things that matter to them.
Mike
···
On 06/16/2014 06:35 AM, Tom McKay wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo
>> (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all
>> preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct
>> permission to use them.
>>
>> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are
>> additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then
>> contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
>>
>> What are your thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Walden
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "foreman-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> Thinking ahead, I'd like a way to hide UI completely when I begin re-implementing headpin (foretello just for Red Hat subscription management). I would suggest that permission based elements be hidden.
>
–
Mike McCune
mmccune AT redhat.com
Red Hat Engineering | Portland, OR
Systems Management | 650-254-4248
>> Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
> That's not really possible as this is Bastion javascript and html we are talking about here.
>
>> On the other hand, people will see all links and buttons even if they will
>> never have access to use them. User interface then seems unclear and hard to
>> use. I'd vote for hiding.
> That's true, and fewer choices is generally better in UI design. Especially if you can't actually choose some of the choices.
>
> I'll go with hidden unless there are any objections.
Walden,
+1 from me for hiding actions that the user isn't allowed to use.
thanks,
Brad
···
On 06/16/2014 09:17 AM, Walden Raines wrote:
>
> Cheers,
> Walden
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bryan Kearney"
> To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 7:18:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Katello: disabled vs readonly buttons
>
>
>
> On 06/16/2014 03:20 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>> On 13/06/14 19:56, Walden Raines wrote:
>>> I'm working on making the UI reflect a user's permissions in Katllo (https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/4226). I was wondering if y'all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn't have the correct permission to use them.
>>>
>>> I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they are needed.
>>>
>>> What are your thoughts?
>> Foreman has a mix of styles, but I think generally on index pages we
>> hide buttons and links that the user doesn't have permissions to access.
>> A few pages such as host#show will disable buttons for console/power
>> etc that the user doesn't have permission for.
>>
>> (link_to_if_authorized versus display_link_if_authorized helper)
>>
> Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
>
> -- bk
>
> >> Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
> > That's not really possible as this is Bastion javascript and html we are
> > talking about here.
> >
> >> On the other hand, people will see all links and buttons even if they will
> >> never have access to use them. User interface then seems unclear and hard
> >> to
> >> use. I'd vote for hiding.
> > That's true, and fewer choices is generally better in UI design.
> > Especially if you can't actually choose some of the choices.
> >
> > I'll go with hidden unless there are any objections.
> Walden,
>
> +1 from me for hiding actions that the user isn't allowed to use.
I agree:
Hidden - When user can't access functionality based on RBAC
Disabled - When user has access to functionality set, but is temporarily not applicable
···
----- Original Message -----
> On 06/16/2014 09:17 AM, Walden Raines wrote:
thanks,
Brad
Cheers,
Walden
----- Original Message -----
From: “Bryan Kearney” bryan.kearney@gmail.com
To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 7:18:33 AM
Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Katello: disabled vs readonly buttons
On 06/16/2014 03:20 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
On 13/06/14 19:56, Walden Raines wrote:
I’m working on making the UI reflect a user’s permissions in Katllo
(Fixes #5503/BZ1102315 - restrict UI interactions to actual permissions in Bastion. by waldenraines · Pull Request #4226 · Katello/katello · GitHub). I was wondering if
y’all preferred disabling or hiding buttons when a user doesn’t have the
correct permission to use them.
I prefer disabled buttons because that informs the user that there are
additional actions which they do not have permission to. The user can
then contact an administrator to gain the correct permissions if they
are needed.
What are your thoughts?
Foreman has a mix of styles, but I think generally on index pages we
hide buttons and links that the user doesn’t have permissions to access.
A few pages such as host#show will disable buttons for console/power
etc that the user doesn’t have permission for.
(link_to_if_authorized versus display_link_if_authorized helper)
Should the code use these helpers to be consistent with the app?
– bk
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
