Examples of filtered lists with dropdowns

28 Sep 2009 - 8:40pm
4 years ago
4 replies
620 reads
R Sengers
2008

Does anyone have good examples of lists w/ filter dropdowns, where the
dropdowns show the number of items available for each select option? ...With
a good solution for how to handle these numbers once the user starts making
selections in other dropdowns.

I'm especially interested in lists that do not redraw instantly, because
that option isn't available to us right now because of technical
limitations. Instead, the user would need to click on an update button to
redraw the list.

(We're using dropdowns because we have very limited real estate available on
the page.)

Thanks
Rachel

Comments

28 Sep 2009 - 11:22pm
Audrey Crane
2009

Rachel, see Google's search nearby.

Put in an address.
Click on the marker
Click on the "search nearby" link in the window that opens.
Type "restaurant"
Look in the left column. You'll see "Narrow by" and some links
that effectively act like pull-down menus as far as limited space for
the links themselves are concerned.

There are no numbers here, but I thought it was worth mentioning as
it's an interesting non-pulldown thing and one could imagine
numbers.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=46155

29 Sep 2009 - 5:32pm
Kim van Poelgeest
2009

Sounds like a variant on "faceted navigation". It's used often with
ecommerce websites having tons of categories to browse.
http://simile.mit.edu/wiki/Faceted_Browser

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=46155

29 Sep 2009 - 9:39am
David Lambert
2009

I used to work for a software company that built a configurator /
business rules engine. We drove web sites where inputs to one field
would impact the availability / validity of options in other fields.
It sounds like you have this sort of scenario, too.

We had some control over whether any given input would cause
re-evaluation of the rules, such that the other fields (including
drop-downs) would be re-drawn to reflect the choices that were still
valid.

We found that it was very important to re-draw when changes were
likely to influence other controls on the same page, because users
*really* don't like to make a selection in a control, only to be
told that it's not a valid selection because of a choice they made
two fields upstream.

This is somewhat analogous to booking a flight, and having gone all
the way through to choosing your seats, etc., be told that you've
got to go back to the beginning because there isn't any room left on
that flight, after all. These situations are sometimes unavoidable,
but they'll never fail to frustrate a user.

If you've got a high interaction among fields like this, I'd
consider forcing the update so that the user is presented with
choices that are (to the best of your knowledge) valid choices for
them to make.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=46155

2 Oct 2009 - 9:18am
Oleh Kovalchuke
2006

In other words: disable or hide downstream filters, untill (and whenever)
the upstream filter is defined.
--
Oleh Kovalchuke
Interaction Design is design of time
http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:39 AM, dlambert <dlambert at appdev.info> wrote:

> I used to work for a software company that built a configurator /
> business rules engine. We drove web sites where inputs to one field
> would impact the availability / validity of options in other fields.
> It sounds like you have this sort of scenario, too.
>
> We had some control over whether any given input would cause
> re-evaluation of the rules, such that the other fields (including
> drop-downs) would be re-drawn to reflect the choices that were still
> valid.
>
> We found that it was very important to re-draw when changes were
> likely to influence other controls on the same page, because users
> *really* don't like to make a selection in a control, only to be
> told that it's not a valid selection because of a choice they made
> two fields upstream.
>
> This is somewhat analogous to booking a flight, and having gone all
> the way through to choosing your seats, etc., be told that you've
> got to go back to the beginning because there isn't any room left on
> that flight, after all. These situations are sometimes unavoidable,
> but they'll never fail to frustrate a user.
>
> If you've got a high interaction among fields like this, I'd
> consider forcing the update so that the user is presented with
> choices that are (to the best of your knowledge) valid choices for
> them to make.
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=46155
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

Syndicate content Get the feed