Should a toggle button show its current state or the state to which it will change?
Should a toggle button show its current state or the state to which it will change?
I have a quick question about buttons that toggle between two states. (Think Play/Pause, or Shuffle/Regular Play.) As the title says, should the toggle show it's current state or the state to which...
cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/9907892
It should show the current state, just like a checkbox shows if its option is enabled, an input box its current value etc. Everything else doesn't make sense.
Exactly. A light switch* shows its current state, and toggle buttons are effectively an equivalent to that.
*Standard, two-way garden variety light switch
Light switches are a bad example. Up doesn't mean on and down doesn't mean off when you have multiple switches for the same thing.
These switches visibly have 2 states and switching it means you want the other one. In tech it's less obvious that there are only two states and that toggling the button will do something in particular. Recall the play and pause button on your media app. That button could change the state in any number of ways but in order to convey to the user what will happen BEFORE the button is pressed, the player shows what action will take place.
You're already in the current state, that rarely adds info. Toggles should indicate what they will do.
Without seeing an example I would've said a button (actual button, not a checkbox or slider) should show the future state. If a button says "Cancel" I would expect the state to go from a pending state to a cancelled state. Same with a button that says "Submit". So if it's some kind of toggle, like play/pause, I would think hitting ⏸️ means I'm currently playing and I want to pause.
Buttons don't show what is currently happening, but what action, with the provided user input via toggles, input boxes, checkboxes if any, should be taken. In your example, your Cancel Button should Cancel the transaction.
@BrianTheeBiscuiteer @DmMacniel
I see now there's some confusion. When it said "toggle button", I thought a Switch was being discussed, but when I clicked on the OP I see it actually does mean button, so we've got some people talking about switches and some people talking about buttons (and yeah, a switch should show current state, but a button should show what would happen if you clicked it).
This would be correct if the post was about switches (which TBF many people made that mistake, including me initially), but it's about buttons - buttons should show what action will result from clicking on them. e.g. "Cancel" on a button which is going to cancel your process. For a play/pause button it should show play if you're paused (if I click on this it will start playing) and pause if you're playing (if I click on this it will pause).
Toggles should not exist. They should be check boxes. Checked if "ON", unchecked if "OFF" with a mouse over tooltip if there is any chance that it's ambiguous.
@calcopiritus @starman
Buttons/switches trigger an immediate action, whereas checkboxes usually do not (such as on a settings page, where no changes are applied unless you click "save").The case that undermines your point is icon toggles, since they don't need a label, but a checkbox does. For example, dark mode icon buttons: They usually show sun or moon icons, which hits OP's point: if your in dark mode, and the button shows a moon, that would make sense -- except the button doesn't put you into dark mode, at that point it puts you into light mode, so, shouldn't it show the sun?
You can just have both icons on either side of the toggle like in the accepted answer
I agree with the accepted answer that a toggle button UI -- when unadorned with any other indicators -- should be avoided due to the ambiguity. The fact that this question is being asked is an indicator of non-uniform consensus.
In American English, the verb "to table" means "to remove from discussion entirely", which is almost entirely the opposite meaning from English spoken anywhere else in the world, where it means "to bring forward for discussion". As a result of this US-specific confusion, there's not much choice besides either clarifying through context or avoiding sentence constructions using that verb, at least when speaking to or with other Americans.
I think the same applies here: the small UI space savings is not worth the inevitable UX confusion this would cause, without modifications.
"Sanction" is another great contranym. As far as I know, the meaning doesn't even depend on dialect, just context.
There are a few words that are their own antonyms. You would think any at all would be too many..
My rule is if it's a Verb, then what it will do: "Enable", "Join/Leave", "Turn on/off", "Play/Pause"
If it's an adjective, noun or description of a state, then the condition is what is written. ON/OFF, Enabled, Joined/Left, "Repeating 1/Repeating ALL/Repeat OFF"
Shuffle/Random Play is ambiguous, but it's either Shuffle ON, Shuffle OFF like the second category, or Shuffle/Unshuffle as the first category.
E: Added the media player example from the original thread.
If it's a verb it should be a button, not a toggle
Depends on what the purpose of the button is.
A setting should show the current state, but an action (referring to the play button example) should show the state it'll transition to.
I disagree. I think both the current state and the state it will change to should be clearly labeled.
Also - just because everyone is familiar with something doesn't make it a good user experience. We're used to play/pause but it's honestly not very good.
I don't know what a great one is but I have an example of a terrible one:
the green/black glue gun has the worst on/off switch I've ever encountered.
You can't see it in the picture, but the actual switch that arrow is pointing to has no text on or around it, so you're left to pick up or down, plug it in, and wait a few minutes see if you were right.
Wow that's terrible design
Typically such a switch would have a ridge on the “on” side to remove that confusion, if they didn’t label it outright. Pity if they neglected that too.
Or a different "feel" when turned on vs. off (more resistance or something). They spent effort printing all that text to show where the switch was when a universal 0/1 would have made it clear.
I can't think of any example of a button or switch that by itself can be clear if it is engaged or not. A button could be assumed to be on if in, but that isn't always the case, like for example with emergency stops.
I've always wanted a power switch on my hot glue gun but after seeing that, I think I'm now perfectly fine with the existing situation, lest I monkey's paw my way to an even worse implementation.
to be fair, it's a great glue gun, and the newer designs have fixed this issue by adding an indicator light.
Knowing how a switch works in a circuit and how it's typically represented in schematics, I would guess that moving the switch toward the body of the gun should be off.
But if actually placing a bet, I'd put my money on it being the other way.
I carved "On" into mine, it's exactly opposite of what you described.
Personal opinion, but it should show a single state and if it is active.
Neither. A button should show action it performs.
Why is this 13 year old stack overflow question being reposted
Weird, but I found it a super interesting read. It made me think of Home Assistant as one of the only software that I could think of that uses a toggle button from the top of my head. I think it handles these states wonderfully.
Edit: The big one I rarely see. But, either one seems quite intuitive.
Didn't you get the memo? We're doing away with privately-owned platforms and starting fresh in the Fediverse :-)
