Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

The acquisition number is already generated by the system. User would like to modify the number.

User hovers over the number, and it is highlighted in yellow.

User clicks on the number, and it turns into a text field with the number highlighted.

User clicks at the end of the number, and a blinking cursor is placed there.

User deletes the last digit. As soon as the user makes a change, the Undo button becomes available.

User types 0 as the last digit. This number is already in the system, and the "Number exists" message is shown above the text field. An Undo button shows up to the right of the text field.

User clicks on the Undo button. The previously displayed number is restored, and the error message and the Undo button disappears.

User types "a" at the end of the number. This number doesn't exist in the system and can be used. The Undo button appears again, since a change has been made.

User clicks outside of the field, and the text field disappears. The user defined number is displayed as the acquisition number.


Comments

Please comment here...

MF + ATS 3/9/09: Needs some prefatory material, such as "The number may be generated by the system, and this is an example of that interaction." There are a number of different highlight colors used, are these all meaningful/consistent? Can the user click anywhere within the number once it has become a text field? If not, they should be able to. Re: duplicate number - we shouldn't call this an error, it's a "condition." The user should be given the option to undo, but also to override/accept. The phrase "the number doesn't exist and can be used" implies that duplicate numbers will not be allowed, which is untrue. It may be the case in a particular institute that they want that restriction, but we don't want it restricted out of the box.

EY: The wireframes have been updated to accomodate the overwrite action, but I am not sure if the system should allow the user to create duplicate numbers.
The message now looks more like a warning message rather than error.

Dan suggests showing a warning message triggered by institutional rules.