1

Topic: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Why in certain cases the inscription explaining assignment of a field, is allocated on top from it, and in some at the left. What variant and in what cases is more preferable?

2

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, UberPsychoSvin, you wrote: some factors though the main convenience is finite seem To me here: 1. The size of the form. 2. The sizes of explanations and fields (and their ratios). We admit at all of us it is allocated at the left (i.e. we have the table/grid 2xN). 1. If all and them is enough approximately identical sizes - that will look normal. 2. If explanations very long, and fields short - fields appear strongly more to the right of center where probably should there is our focus of attention. As though any more very much, but can work. 3. A situation on the contrary - it is functional. Just as on a picture with Data and Log - possibility the maximum number of characters in a way  to see most important than the remaining. Plus to me for example to drift attention to the left/upwards is more convenient and customarier rather than to the right/downwards. It is clear that it depends on the sizes of the form/font size. At the small sizes of the form of the explanation on top almost unique variant, since Allow to display  number of signs in the explanation and a field. Well as on mobile phones. As to the first picture - there where explanations on top - that the form is riveted a tjap-mistake since the explanation on top is pasted to a field on top, more shortly faugh. Thus there it is enough place for any variant. As a result if it is not engaged any layout engine in the automatic machine - that sense of taste both fine prompts the correct and convenient variant, is finite if this feeling is.

3

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, fddima, you wrote: F> As to the first picture - there where explanations on top - that the form is riveted a tjap-mistake since the explanation on top is pasted to a field on top, more shortly faugh. Thus there it is enough place for any variant. There both forms are made hastily somehow,  the interface at SSMS (a Query Analyzer in girlhood) in tradition from the seven still. However, if to compare with  competitors, especially with pgAdmin, the sky and the earth, certainly.

4

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Sinix, you wrote: S> Hello, fddima, you wrote: F>> As to the first picture - there where explanations on top - that the form is riveted a tjap-mistake since the explanation on top is pasted to a field on top, more shortly faugh. Thus there it is enough place for any variant. S> there both forms are made hastily somehow,  the interface at SSMS (a Query Analyzer in girlhood) in tradition from the seven still. S> However if to compare with  competitors, especially with pgAdmin, the sky and the earth, certainly. PgAdmin at least is. And for  and that is not present.

5

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Glory, you wrote: PgAdmin at least is. And for  and that is not present. For MySQL too a heap . But for people got used to a Query Analyzer / SSMS - all of them seem hand-made articles. Any designers,  with  thus have. And the simple convenient editor - is not present. And at especially  - there is no possibility to fulfill the selected script. I in due time (about 10 years ago) spent much time with phpMyAdmin - quite anything, nevertheless it is better than from the console.

6

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, fddima, you wrote: F> As a result if it is not engaged any layout engine in the automatic machine - that sense of taste both fine prompts the correct and convenient variant, is finite if this feeling is. I.e. at other equal if places suffice, the explanation not too long. That, more a preferred choice, where a label to the left of a field? Because, , I do not know why. Hello, Sinix, you wrote:> There both forms are made hastily somehow Something to me prompts that UI which is direct the standard for imitation, still it is necessary to look.

7

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, UberPsychoSvin, you wrote: UPS> Something prompts to me that UI which is direct the standard for imitation, still it is necessary to look. Well so optionally to search for an ideal. We tell, the studio is fulfilled on the order more accurately. About office generally I am silent. If the example of design for a difficult software in sense "conveniently" is necessary, instead of it is beautiful", it, unconditionally, Vivaldi and all the same studio without .

8

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, UberPsychoSvin, you wrote: I would allocate how  looks at the form. Initially the sight falls on form center. And it is convenient it there and to leave. Therefore the given window of login I made so - on center label Login, under it it too  a data entry field with center alignment. The sight of the user will not run thus and beautifully looks.

9

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, UberPsychoSvin, you wrote: If the login form strongly is more, as on a screen above, I nevertheless would narrow fields, and allocated them on center (login will not be 100 + characters). I prefer signatures at the left, but here a variant, as on top it will be quite good. If is planned , at least to change the size of fonts, i.e. the big font for fields, hardly smaller for signatures - signatures on top, , will look more beautiful. I mean something like input screens in 10, , many sites. Generally it is necessary to beat an empty place in that case, logos, internal borders and other variants. This sort of forms in   probably also are not present, the office for example for input  creates a small window (and it floats by the way plot where - at me in right upper to a corner of the main monitor, Outlook is launched and tear on the second).

10

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Sinix, you wrote: S> Well so optionally to search for an ideal. We tell, the studio is fulfilled on the order more accurately. About office generally I am silent. Here by the way yes, about it I did not think. Though there  not the most fashionable. Now, it seems to me,  try to mold less, and generally superfluous lines to avoid, and there lines divide groups of adjustments. P.S. At me 2012.

11

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, UberPsychoSvin, you wrote: UPS> Why in certain cases the inscription explaining assignment of a field, is allocated on top from it, and in some at the left. UPS> What variant and in what cases is more preferable? The stated criteria are not present. All depends on that, how many at you a place on the screen, and how many  it is necessary to allocate. 1. The circuit "label above" has wider application field: it well approaches for long labels, for labels with very different lengths, for labels with in advance unknown lengths. It is less exacting by the width - in particular, it means that it is possible to manage vertical  (and for  across in forms it is necessary to dismiss). It (more or less) saves layout in RTL surroundings 2. The circuit "label before text" approaches only in exotic cases - when all labels short and more or less identical length. But in these cases it turns out more compactly that is important for type microforms subscribe to our newsletter. For them it is necessary to consider even more extremal strategy of layout of labels - for example, inside .

12

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Glory, you wrote: PgAdmin at least is. And for  and that is not present. http://www.mysql.com/products/workbench/ not?

13

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Varavva, you wrote: V> I would allocate how  looks at the form. Initially the sight falls on form center. And it is convenient it there and to leave. Therefore the given window of login I made so - on center label Login, under it it too  a data entry field with center alignment. The sight of the user will not run thus and beautifully looks. It is yet necessary to forget to place correctly TabOrder, if elements more than one.

14

Re: Principles of the relative layout and explained.

Hello, Stanislaw K, you wrote: SK> it is yet necessary to forget to place correctly TabOrder, if elements more than one. And access key .