Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Usability on small screens review #239

Closed
KatieWoe opened this issue Apr 17, 2019 · 8 comments
Closed

Usability on small screens review #239

KatieWoe opened this issue Apr 17, 2019 · 8 comments

Comments

@KatieWoe
Copy link
Contributor

Per @kathy-phet's request in phetsims/qa#295 I am making issues in each published sim repo detailing the pointer areas and usability of sims on phone sized screens. Done on an iPhone 7 iOS 12 device.

Potential Difficulties Noticed:

  • The faucet of the water in the second screen could be difficult to control. This was likely due to how close it is to the top of the screen and may not be easily fixed.

Screenshots:
Image from iOS (1)
Image from iOS (2)
Image from iOS (3)
Image from iOS (4)
Image from iOS (5)
Image from iOS

@arouinfar
Copy link
Contributor

@chrisklus can you dilate the touch area for the FaucetNode handle a bit more?

@arouinfar arouinfar assigned chrisklus and unassigned arouinfar Apr 17, 2019
@chrisklus
Copy link
Contributor

chrisklus commented Apr 17, 2019

I have a very difficult time checking the energy symbols and link heaters checkboxes on my iPhone SE (smaller screen than any other current iPhone, so perhaps doesn't matter).

@chrisklus
Copy link
Contributor

@arouinfar how does this look?

image

@chrisklus chrisklus assigned arouinfar and unassigned chrisklus Aug 19, 2019
@kathy-phet
Copy link

I have a very difficult time checking the energy symbols and link heaters checkboxes on my iPhone SE (smaller screen than any other current iPhone, so perhaps doesn't matter).

@arouinfar - What do you think about making these touch areas for the checkboxes bigger in any direction - so its easier to hit? Perhaps the checkboxes could have a bit more vertical padding/space.

@arouinfar
Copy link
Contributor

@arouinfar how does this look?

Looks good!

I have a very difficult time checking the energy symbols and link heaters checkboxes on my iPhone SE (smaller screen than any other current iPhone, so perhaps doesn't matter).

@arouinfar - What do you think about making these touch areas for the checkboxes bigger in any direction - so its easier to hit? Perhaps the checkboxes could have a bit more vertical padding/space.

I can't remember if we added asymmetric touch area dilation to checkboxes or not, so perhaps @chrisklus can comment about whether this is currently supported or not. I think we could certainly add a bit more vertical padding between the checkboxes. Perhaps a few extra pixels @chrisklus?

@arouinfar arouinfar assigned chrisklus and unassigned arouinfar Aug 21, 2019
chrisklus added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 29, 2019
@chrisklus
Copy link
Contributor

@chrisklus can comment about whether this is currently supported or not.

It doesn't look like we support this with the typical dilation options but I think I can pass in a custom touch area that has a pre-calculated size. I'll ask if this is the standard way for checkboxes.

@chrisklus
Copy link
Contributor

I think I can pass in a custom touch area that has a pre-calculated size. I'll ask if this is the standard way for checkboxes.

That is what's done for the usages I found, so I went ahead with this pattern. Per #239 (comment), I increased the padding between the two checkboxes by 2px, and dilated the touch areas by 5px on the top and bottom.

Before:

image

After:

image

I dilated the "Energy Symbols" checkbox on the Systems screen as well. They are now much easier to select on my iPhone SE.

Anything left for this issue @arouinfar?

@arouinfar
Copy link
Contributor

Nice, thanks @chrisklus! I think that takes care of everything, closing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants