With each additional character that the user types, the software quietly forms a list of the
possible completions to that partially entered string. If the user enters one of a limited
number of possible valid values, use that set of valid values. If the possible values are wide
open, one of these might supply completions:
• Previous entries typed by this user, stored in a preferences or history mechanism
• Common phrases that many users have used in the past, supplied as a built-in “dictionary”
for the application
• Possible matches drawn from the content being searched or perused, as for a sitewide
search box
• Other artifacts appropriate to the context, such as company-wide contact lists for
internal email
From here, you can approach the interaction design of Autocompletion in two ways. One is
to show the user a list of possible completions on demand—for example, by pressing the
Tab key—and let him choose one explicitly by picking from that list. Many code editors
do this (see Figure 8-26 in the Examples section). It’s probably better used when the user
would recognize what he wants when he sees it, but may not remember how to type it
without help. “Knowledge in the world is better than knowledge in the head.”
The other way is to wait until there’s only one reasonable completion, and then put it in
front of the user, unprompted. Word does this with a tool tip; many forms do it by filling
in the remainder of the entry but with selection turned on, so another keystroke would
wipe out the autocompleted part. Either way, the user gets a choice about whether to retain
the Autocompletion or not—and the default is to not keep it.
With each additional character that the user types, the software quietly forms a list of thepossible completions to that partially entered string. If the user enters one of a limitednumber of possible valid values, use that set of valid values. If the possible values are wideopen, one of these might supply completions:• Previous entries typed by this user, stored in a preferences or history mechanism• Common phrases that many users have used in the past, supplied as a built-in “dictionary”for the application• Possible matches drawn from the content being searched or perused, as for a sitewidesearch box• Other artifacts appropriate to the context, such as company-wide contact lists forinternal emailFrom here, you can approach the interaction design of Autocompletion in two ways. One isto show the user a list of possible completions on demand—for example, by pressing theTab key—and let him choose one explicitly by picking from that list. Many code editorsdo this (see Figure 8-26 in the Examples section). It’s probably better used when the userwould recognize what he wants when he sees it, but may not remember how to type itwithout help. “Knowledge in the world is better than knowledge in the head.”The other way is to wait until there’s only one reasonable completion, and then put it infront of the user, unprompted. Word does this with a tool tip; many forms do it by fillingin the remainder of the entry but with selection turned on, so another keystroke wouldwipe out the autocompleted part. Either way, the user gets a choice about whether to retainthe Autocompletion or not—and the default is to not keep it.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
