Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Process header and menu design explorations #4230

Closed
furilo opened this issue Oct 4, 2018 · 17 comments
Closed

Process header and menu design explorations #4230

furilo opened this issue Oct 4, 2018 · 17 comments

Comments

@furilo
Copy link

furilo commented Oct 4, 2018

Here are some explorations about changes in process header and menu, in order to make the menu more visible and improve the phases indicator/CTA. Comments:

  1. Hero style: we'd transition to a hero style, taking ideas from our initial proposal. The main reason is that this way we can have a more visible menu. Visually maybe its more appealling. We gain a little bit of vertical space. This hero version would allow to create different design footprints for different sections easily. For example for conferences we'd have a taller header without almost any other change.
  2. Help system: I propose a system so that the user can close a help banner; if they do it, they will be able to open it again with a small widget in the same position. I think it'd work well as it's not intrusive at all and it fits with this new design.
  3. New white phase box vs. new process intro blocks: if we decide to end up implementing the process intro blocks (System help / Process intro #4136) maybe they are a little bit similar/redundant with the new Phase Box in the header. I'd think first on the header, and if we like it, think about the Intro Blocks.
  4. I've included a test when viewed in a super-wide screen. I think it'd work well.
  5. This changes only affect the header, so implementation is clean.
  6. I open a new issue to discuss what to do when items in the menu don't fit in a single line.

A. New header on process home

header test 2 - standard content

B. New header on proposals

header test 2 - proposals

C. New header with Intro Blocks

header test 2

D. New header on super-wide screen

header test 2 - proposals wide screen

E. New header with short help

header test 2 - help

F. New header with long help

header test 2 - help big

G. New header with help on proposals

header test 2 - proposals help

Related with #4136 #3973

cc @decidim/product @decidim/lot-core

@furilo furilo self-assigned this Oct 4, 2018
@furilo furilo changed the title Process header and menu explorations Process header and menu design explorations Oct 4, 2018
@mrcasals
Copy link
Contributor

mrcasals commented Oct 4, 2018

Looks good to me! I really liked your initial proposal when you presented it, so 👍 for me!

Just a question, the help section does not exist right now, right?

@carolromero
Copy link
Member

carolromero commented Oct 4, 2018

Hi @furilo, this is great! With this solution we're solving several problems at once. Also, your initial proposal always was a winner from the beginning 😎

Some comments / doubts:

  • I love the hero style, and as you say, stays in tune with the current design of Conferences.
  • Help system: definitely I'd go with your new proposal, I think it works very well. I understand that these are the announcements that we have already implemented (in almost every place), right? (Is that what you were asking @mrcasals?)
  • Regarding the intro blocks, maybe this is the one I would drop because it can really bring some confusion vs the white phase box.
  • Just a quick doubt on menu items color: what happens in the case of Reus, for example, that they chose a yellowish color?

@furilo
Copy link
Author

furilo commented Oct 8, 2018

@mrcasals the help section is the evolution of the banner call out we have. It would mean just adding the ability to add banners in more sections. Let's keep discussing in #3973

@carolromero Reus could look something like:

imagen

I guess we have the OK to proceed to HTML. Please confirm @decidim/product

@mrcasals
Copy link
Contributor

mrcasals commented Oct 8, 2018

@furilo thanks! The issue you link to doesn't seem to be related to this, maybe you mistyped it? 😄

@furilo
Copy link
Author

furilo commented Oct 8, 2018

@mrcasals haha totally: here it is: #3973

@carolromero
Copy link
Member

Hi @furilo we have pending this: #4231 before we move forward. Also, when you click the "More..." link, how is the complete menu displayed?

@oriolgual
Copy link
Contributor

if the menu is also changing, shouldn't we apply this header to other participatory spaces?

@Crashillo
Copy link
Member

Design PR #4284

@carolromero
Copy link
Member

Hi @oriolgual, yes we should. I now see that we've been talking about process header when in fact we're referring to space header.

@mrcasals
Copy link
Contributor

@decidim/lot-px we were discussing this in the PR, but I think it's better if everyone is involved here: what happens when a participatory space does not have phases/steps? Considering that right now we don't have a CTA, so I guess both the button and the steps "progressbar" should disappear? Wouldn't the box look weird then?

@mrcasals
Copy link
Contributor

Also, @decidim/product 👆

@Crashillo
Copy link
Member

I've updated the screenshot accordingly, @mrcasals
#4284 (comment)

@mrcasals
Copy link
Contributor

@decidim/product @decidim/lot-px the related PR has been merged and the new layout is already on master, can we close this issue or is there something pending?

@carolromero
Copy link
Member

@mrcasals @decidim/lot-px in this issue there is also the new design of announcements for contextual help. If this is also been merged we can close it.

@oriolgual
Copy link
Contributor

Nope, we're still working on the announcements.

@Crashillo
Copy link
Member

So @oriolgual, I'll assume @decidim/lot-core is on this. I update labels properly.

@Crashillo Crashillo removed their assignment Nov 16, 2018
@oriolgual
Copy link
Contributor

Yes @Crashillo, and I think we can close this, thew new header and contextual help have been merged.

@ghost ghost removed the status: Ready-to-dev label Nov 16, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants