![]() ![]() ![]() But in my opinion, modal dialogs are often better suited to short, snappy interactions. You'll only have to worry about closing a single modal dialog. You could use pagination, or even just loading/unloading different Scene's inside the modal dialog after button presses. Then you can change the Scene inside the single modal dialog depending on the users actions. To be honest, if you have to use modal dialogs then it would be better to reduce the number of dialogs to a single one. However, that is pretty complex and doesn't sound appealing to me as an implementation. For example, when the 2nd modal is closed, it could update one of its Boolean Properties, and if that is bound to a Boolean Property of the 1st modal then it could close in response to that change. If those Boolean Properties are bound to each other, you could kind of force the responsiveness you desire. You could implement controllers for the Modal Dialogs which contain Boolean Properties that capture the state of the order use case. A byproduct of using multiple stacked modal dialogs is also that it adds the kind of implementation complexity that you're encountering. Requiring the user to have to close a window to see previously inputted data feels worse and is harder to remember the data compared to the alternatives of scrolling up/down or moving back/forward in paginated screens. I think in general, the field of UX design has come to the consensus that it is best to avoid this practice, because it has some "mental model" issues for the end user. I'm afraid that you've encountered a fairly common issue when it comes to "stacking" multiple modal dialogs on top of each other for sequential actions/steps. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |