Adding Recommendation to Avoid Negating Texts and Phrases?
The Web page https://suse.eosdesignsystem.com/writing/ux-writing contains writing guidelines for UI/UX. This is great! I would like to see a small addition:
How to deal with negating phrases?
I just discovered a good example. In bsc#1169085 I've discovered a YaST interface which I would consider the wrong logic due to a negating phrase:
Startup onboot▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒↓ ┌[x] No Login Authentication─────────────────────────────────┐ │Authentication by Initiator │ │Username Password │ │▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒│ │ │ │ │ │Authentication by Targets │ │Username Password │ │▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
I'm referring to the checkbox labeled
[x] No Login Authentication. For the details refer to the above Bugzilla entry.
IMHO, we should give developers some recommendations how to deal with these things. It's a well-known fact in documentation to avoid negating phrases as it comes with these problems:
- Negating phrases are harder to read/parse by humans (it takes a little bit longer).
- It make things a little bit more complicated for our customers than it should be.
- Negating phrases are usually longer than affirmative phrases (not always, but in most cases).
- It can be misunderstood.
To help our developers and other people, we should give some recommendations. I think, a small example should be enough.
I confirm that I have
- Entered all the required information to help maintainers easily verify this issue.
- Added a label describing what it is affecting.
- Not added the label confirm, since this label will be added by maintainers or issue reviewer.