简体   繁体   English

在确定菜单项目的位置时是否有任何标准可供遵循?

[英]Are there any standards to follow in determining where to place menu items?

In developing Windows forms based application, are there any standards that should be followed when designing your form's main menu system? 在开发基于Windows窗体的应用程序时,在设计表单的主菜单系统时是否应遵循任何标准?

Most windows applications with menu systems will have your standard File | 大多数带菜单系统的Windows应用程序都有您的标准文件| Edit | 编辑| View | 查看| Tools | 工具| Help menus. 帮助菜单。 How do you determine placement of any additional top level menu items? 如何确定任何其他顶级菜单项的位置?

In addition, how do you determine placement of sub-menu items? 另外,如何确定子菜单项的位置? For example, what rules or principles would you follow to determine whether an items should be placed in the Edit, Tools, or maybe your own non-standard top-level menu? 例如,您将遵循哪些规则或原则来确定是否应将项目放在“编辑”,“工具”或您自己的非标准顶级菜单中?

I am looking for two things here: 我在这里寻找两件事:

  1. Published resources (web or print) that detail this (especially if it is from Microsoft), or other material from UX or UI professionals. 发布的资源(网络或打印)详细说明了这一点(特别是如果它来自Microsoft),或来自UX或UI专业人员的其他资料。
  2. Your own opinions. 你自己的意见。

Based on a response by Gamecat mentioning the Ribbon, I'll expand this to the Ribbon as well. 基于Gamecat提到功能区的响应,我将把它扩展到功能区。 How do you determine which tab buttons appear on? 如何确定显示哪些标签按钮? Looking for the same as above. 寻找与上述相同的内容。

Related question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/126797/is-there-a-style-guide-for-guis-somewhere 相关问题: https //stackoverflow.com/questions/126797/is-there-a-style-guide-for-guis-somewhere

Microsoft's Vista User Experience Guidelines are at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511258.aspx 微软的Vista用户体验指南位于: http//msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511258.aspx

Content specific to menus, including standard menus, is at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511502.aspx 菜单特有的内容(包括标准菜单)位于: http//msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511502.aspx

This includes standard order of menus and menu items, their names, and their accelerators. 这包括菜单和菜单项的标准顺序,名称和加速器。

Some general guidelines: 一些一般准则:

File is for commands that affect the entire content the user is working on (generally a file) or the entire application (eg, Exit). 文件用于影响用户正在处理的整个内容(通常是文件)或整个应用程序(例如,退出)的命令。 It's also a good place for users to select the form they want to work on. 它也是用户选择他们想要处理的表单的好地方。

Edit is for selecting pieces of content (eg, Find, Select All) and acting on such pieces (Copy, Delete). 编辑用于选择内容片段(例如,查找,全选)并对此片段进行操作(复制,删除)。 Do not use it as a general “change something” menu (eg, to “edit” preferences or a macro). 不要将它用作一般的“更改内容”菜单(例如,“编辑”首选项或宏)。

View changes the appearance or presentation of the content while not changing the underlying content itself (eg, what users entered into your forms). 查看更改内容的外观或表示,同时不更改基础内容本身(例如,用户在表单中输入的内容)。 Consider not including in View menu items for controlling the presence of toolbars (toolbars are not content). 考虑不在视图菜单项中包含用于控制工具栏的存在(工具栏不是内容)。 That really should be with Options/Preferences. 这应该是选项/偏好。

Although it's listed as a standard, I would avoid the Tools menu. 虽然它被列为标准,但我会避免使用“工具”菜单。 The name has no meaning and the contents are too often random junk. 该名称没有任何意义,内容往往是随机垃圾。 Consider the names and organization used by the Office Ribbon (eg, where Options are under the equivalent of File). 考虑Office功能区使用的名称和组织(例如,选项位于File的等效位置)。 See http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/01/31/520061.aspx . 请参见http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/01/31/520061.aspx

Generally place application-specific menu items below standard menu items in a standard menu so the user's muscle memory is not disrupted for the standard menu items. 通常将标准菜单项下的特定于应用程序的菜单项放在标准菜单中,以便用户的肌肉记忆不会因标准菜单项而中断。 However, if a app-specifc menu item is a variation of a standard menu item, then place it immediately below the standard menu item (eg, Find Next below Find or Paste Special below Paste) 但是,如果应用程序特定的菜单项是标准菜单项的变体,则将其置于标准菜单项的下方(例如,查找下面的查找或粘贴下面的特殊粘贴)

Don't be afraid to create your own menus for items that do not fit in the above. 不要害怕为不适合上述项目的项目创建自己的菜单。 Menubars often have insufficient breadth, creating a weak information scent especially for non-standard menu items. 菜单栏通常没有足够的宽度,特别是对于非标准菜单项,会产生微弱的信息气味。 Eight to 10 menus is perfectly acceptable. 八到十个菜单是完全可以接受的。 A menu with only three menu items is perfectly acceptable; 只有三个菜单项的菜单是完全可以接受的; one with two menu items is not out of the question. 一个有两个菜单项是不可能的。

Cascade or sub-menus are awkward to use. 级联或子菜单很难使用。 Group menu items by separators instead. 改为使用分隔符对菜单项进行分组。 A menu may have ~15 items before it's necessary to consider cascade menus. 在需要考虑级联菜单之前,菜单可能有~15个项目。 If you have so many menu items, first consider breaking some off as a separate menu, rather than a cascade menu in a menu. 如果你有这么多的菜单项,首先考虑将一些菜单作为一个单独的菜单,而不是菜单中的级联菜单。

Place your app-specific menus after View but before Window or Help on the menu bar. 在View之后但在菜单栏上的Window或Help之前放置您的应用程序特定菜单。 I strongly recommend user research (eg, card sorting) for organizing and naming non-standard menus. 我强烈建议用户研究(例如,卡片分类)来组织和命名非标准菜单。

Look closely at the Ribbon, and you'll see it's organization is pretty much the same as menu bars, with equivalents for File (the logo menu), Edit (the “Home” tab, which includes formatting) and View, so from an organizational standpoint, it makes little difference whether you're using a Ribbon or menubar. 仔细查看功能区,您会看到它的组织与菜单栏几乎相同,文件(徽标菜单),编辑(“主页”选项卡,包括格式)和视图等效,因此从从组织的角度来看,无论您使用的是Ribbon还是菜单栏都没什么区别。

The menubar is still the best choice for most apps. 菜单栏仍然是大多数应用程序的最佳选择。 The Ribbon does not mean less clicks than a traditional menubar/toolbar combination. 功能区并不意味着比传统的菜单栏/工具栏组合更少的点击次数。 Don't leap to the Ribbon just because MS is pushing it. 不要因为MS正在推动它而跳到功能区。 I have details at http://www.zuschlogin.com/?p=36 . 我在http://www.zuschlogin.com/?p=36上有详细信息。

Yes... Logical grouping of menus help your users remember things easily. 是的...菜单的逻辑分组可以帮助您的用户轻松记住事物。 I too don't prefer have a "Tools" menu and dumping everything that doesn't belong elsewhere here... There should be an "Application Menu" like Mac or like the Office Button (Outspace UI in 2010) where you can have those "tools" or preferences. 我也不喜欢有一个“工具”菜单并转储不属于其他地方的所有内容......应该有一个像Mac一样的“应用程序菜单”,或者像Office按钮(2010年的Outspace UI),你可以拥有那些“工具”或偏好。

Regarding button ordering, try following the platform conventions... http://blog.mugunthkumar.com/tech/elements-of-usability-design-okcancel-vs-cancelok-is-it-just-a-matter-of-taste/ 关于按钮订购,请尝试遵循平台约定... http://blog.mugunthkumar.com/tech/elements-of-usability-design-okcancel-vs-cancelok-is-it-just-a-matter-of-味道/

Not a standard, but you could use the office products as a guideline. 不是标准,但您可以使用办公产品作为指导。

By the way, menu's are from the past, it is all Ribbon now. 顺便说一下,菜单是过去的,现在都是Ribbon。 And at first I was sceptic about the ribbon, but now I think it's a very good idea. 起初我对这个色带持怀疑态度,但现在我认为这是一个非常好的主意。 (Minimizing mouse clicks is always a good idea). (最小化鼠标点击总是一个好主意)。

Nice link: http://blogs.msdn.com/jeffdav/archive/2004/12/07/278012.aspx 不错的链接: http//blogs.msdn.com/jeffdav/archive/2004/12/07/278012.aspx

There are several standards available: 有几种标准可供选择:

Apple has a long guide just for this on their platform: Apple在他们的平台上有一个很长的指南:

The Microsoft Ribbon documentation: Microsoft Ribbon文档:

Also, documentation on what type of interface (menu bars, ribbons, toolbars, direct command, etc) should be used for different types of applications: 此外,有关不同类型的应用程序应使用哪种类型的界面(菜单栏,色带,工具栏,直接命令等)的文档:

Some things to keep in mind. 要记住一些事情。

Both of the standardized methods were developed and implemented in desktop software before the web. 两种标准化方法都是在Web之前的桌面软件中开发和实现的。 This means that both of these models were not designed with the web context in mind. 这意味着这两个模型都没有考虑到Web上下文。 There is one big difference between the traditional desktop environment and a web-based environment – the browser's “Back” button. 传统的桌面环境和基于Web的环境之间存在一个很大的区别 - 浏览器的“后退”按钮。

o “Cancel” is also a way to “go back” and “OK” is a way to move “forward”. o“取消”也是“返回”的一种方式,“确定”是一种“前进”的方式。 This “Forwards/Backwards” metaphor underlies most forms of “Cancel” and “OK” functions. 这种“前进/后退”比喻是大多数形式的“取消”和“确定”功能的基础。

Here are some other extensions of this metaphor: 以下是这个比喻的一些其他扩展:

  • We use visualization to communicate complex ideas. 我们使用可视化来传达复杂的想法。 Graphical User Interfaces are one form of visualization. 图形用户界面是一种可视化形式。 We have an strong history of visualization standards in Western (and more specifically US American culture) 我们在西方(更具体地说是美国美国文化)的可视化标准有着悠久的历史

o Time: in our standard visualizations ”Old” is usually depicted on the left, “New” is depicted on the right (most graphical depictions of time use this left-to-right metaphor) o时间:在我们的标准可视化中,“旧”通常在左侧描绘,“新”在右侧描绘(大多数时间的图形描绘使用这种从左到右的比喻)

o Process: We use the left-to-right metaphor when visualizing progressive steps: “First” is on the left, “Second” is usually displayed on the right. o过程:我们在逐步显示渐进式步骤时使用从左到右的比喻:“第一个”在左侧,“第二个”通常显示在右侧。

o Writing and Reading: in writing and reading we “continue” or move “forward” from left to right (unless we're in Asia of course) o写作和阅读:在写作和阅读中,我们“继续”或从左向右“向前”移动(除非我们当然在亚洲)

o In film: film is another form of visualization. o电影:电影是另一种可视化形式。 In film a standard in movement is: if a person is “going somewhere” she moves from the left side of the screen to the right. 在电影中,一个标准的运动是:如果一个人“走到某个地方”,她会从屏幕的左侧移动到右边。 If she's going “back” she travels from right to left 如果她“回来”,她会从右向左行进

o The Cancel/OK model may help to improve conscious decision-making: This model assumes that you want to read the options before making a decision on which action you want to take (advisable on important interactions that require the user's full attention and have more than a couple of actions available to them.) The Cancel/OK model presents the “alternative” actions first (on the left)…so you can read them before deciding that “OK” is the action you really want to take. o取消/确定模型可能有助于改善有意识的决策:此模型假定您在决定要采取哪种行动之前想要阅读选项(建议需要用户充分关注并拥有更多内容的重要互动他们可以使用的几个动作。)取消/确定模型首先(左侧)显示“替代”动作...所以你可以在决定“确定”是你真正想要采取的动作之前阅读它们。 The OK/Cancel model may get the user in the habit of clicking the first option they encounter. 确定/取消模型可能使用户习惯于单击他们遇到的第一个选项。 At the same time, the users who are trained to use the Cancel/OK model may go directly for the “OK” button whenever they're fairly certain that's the choice they want to make. 同时,经过训练使用取消/确定模型的用户可以直接选择“确定”按钮,只要他们确信这是他们想要做出的选择。

o OS Adaptation: Mozilla's Firefox matches the OS being used when displaying the order of the OK and Cancel buttons. o操作系统适配:Mozilla的Firefox与显示“确定”和“取消”按钮顺序时使用的操作系统相匹配。 In other words, the display of the buttons adapts to fit what your OS has trained you to use. 换句话说,按钮的显示适应您的操作系统训练您使用的内容。

This is an interesting survey that addresses this very specific question of which order this buttons should be in: http://measuringuserexperience.com/SubmitCancel/index.htm 这是一个有趣的调查,解决了这个按钮应该在哪个顺序的非常具体的问题: http//measuringuserexperience.com/SubmitCancel/index.htm

  • DM DM

声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.

 
粤ICP备18138465号  © 2020-2024 STACKOOM.COM