Button labels for creating resources are inconsistent: - VirtualMachines, InstanceTypes, Preferences: "Create" - Templates, MigrationPolicies: "Create <resource>" - Bootable volumes: "Add volume" "Create" button menu choices have inconsistent prepositions: - VirtualMachines: Create -> From template/voume/YAML - Bootable volumes, MigrationPolicies: <button> -> With form/YAML
Hi Yifat, PTAL at this issue and add suggestions, as I think some of these inconsistencies have good reasons, but some of them probably are really inconsistencies that should be fixed. Thanks!
@apinnick I think there is a difference between the use cases you mentioned here. Regarding Button labels for creating resources are inconsistent: - VirtualMachines, InstanceTypes, Preferences: "Create" - Templates, MigrationPolicies: "Create <resource>" - Bootable volumes: "Add volume" In the VMs page We decided to remove the resource name from the blue dropdown button to include the different options. In the templates page we don't have a dropdown button to create a template so I think Create template makes sense. For bootable volumes - I don't think it's correct to say we are creating a bootable volumes because we are just adding one that is not shown on the list, but please correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding "Create" button menu choices have inconsistent prepositions: - VirtualMachines: Create -> From template/voume/YAML - Bootable volumes, MigrationPolicies: <button> -> With form/YAML I am not sure which one (From or With) is more correct in English terms, but I agree it should be consistent - so leaving it up to you to decide. cc @ronen
> In the VMs page We decided to remove the resource name from the blue dropdown button to include the different options. That would be consistent with other parts of the OCP web console. It looks like "Create" is used when there is a dropdown menu with options. BTW, the second option for creating VMs: Create > From volume. Shouldn't this be "From InstanceType"? > In the templates page we don't have a dropdown button to create a template so I think Create template makes sense. That also would be consistent. The UI uses "Create <resource>" on pages where there is only one option. Examples: "Create Service", "Create StorageClass", "Create Route". So "Create template" would be good. > For bootable volumes - I don't think it's correct to say we are creating a bootable volumes because we are just adding one that is not shown on the list, but please correct me if I'm wrong. OK, "Add" makes sense. I think you should change "Add volume" to "Add" (plus menu options). That would be consistent with using "Create" (plus menu options). Re: "Add > With form" - The user can upload a new volume, use an existing volume, or download a volume from a registry. The last option is not mentioned at all. The "Add volume" modal text only mentions upload and use existing volume, but the Source type list includes "Download from registry". That third option should at least be added to the "Add volume" modal text. Re: From... vs With... That depends on the context. "From" suggests that the new resource (VM) is created from an existing resource (template, volume, YAML). "With" suggests that the new resource (VM) is created with a tool (form). Maybe "From" is best because it makes sense in most contexts. "From form" sounds a bit loose from a technical point of view but it does not look like an error, IMO.
> BTW, the second option for creating VMs: Create > From volume. Shouldn't this be "From InstanceType"? This is something we should probably discuss with @ronen @fdeutsch > I think you should change "Add volume" to "Add" (plus menu options). That would be consistent with using "Create" (plus menu options). I am not sure users will understand this. Now when users click the "Add volume" button they get to see (at the top section of the modal) an explanatory text about the options of the Source type they can use. If the "Add volume" button changes to be a dropdown button with the label "Add" - then we won't be able to include this explanation. >The last option is not mentioned at all. The "Add volume" modal text only mentions upload and use existing volume, but the Source type list includes "Download from registry". That third option should at least be added to the "Add volume" modal text. I just checked this in the cluster I have and the "Download from registry" is included as the 3rd option in the modal. >From... vs With... That depends on the context. "From" suggests that the new resource (VM) is created from an existing resource (template, volume, YAML). "With" suggests that the new resource (VM) is created with a tool (form). Maybe "From" is best because it makes sense in most contexts. "From form" sounds a bit loose from a technical point of view but it does not look like an error, IMO. I agree that "From form" doesn't sound very nice and I am wondering if we should be that "punctual" here and also curious to hear what others think.
@apinnick regarding the VM "Create" action, I am trying to understand the right English terms here. As you said, "From" is when using an existing resource (like templates), but is it the same when you need to make multiple selections like with the InstanceTypes, where you need to select both volume and the IT, or when you need to fill out a form? Thanks
Maybe we should not try to standardize the prepositions for all the options (From... vs With ...) but, instead, try to standardize the wording of each option. Perhaps this: - With form <- Because this is a tool. It would have to be consistent across the UI. - From template/instance type/volume/YAML <- Because these are existing objects that are edited to create new objects. What do you think?
I am relying on you as far as the English term to use in each case. Thank you
Hi folks, thank you for your opinions, comments provided in this BZ. Could someone, please, summarize or to make clear decisions about what (and how exactly) needs to be changed in the UI? Or are we still discussing/thinking about possible expected results? Thanks in advance!
So follow my suggestions in comment 6 above.
Hi Avital, I am not sure if I correctly understand your suggestions. According to the Comment 6, I assume that we should change "From YAML" to "With YAML" wherever it occurs, because YAML is not a specific object we are editing, it is that we are editing the object using YAML language or form of a document that represents some data. And the rest of used "From..." or "With form" used in the actual UI seems to me already aligned with what you've suggested in Comment 6. WDYT? Do I understand it correctly? Thanks in advance!
Hilda, I see your point. A YAML is like a form, so maybe we should change it to "With YAML", like "With form". The rest of the prepositions probably already align with the UI. - With YAML, With form - From template, From instance type, From volume Does that make sense?
Hi Avital, yes this does make sense. Thanks for making it clear!
verified on kubevirt-console-plugin-rhel9:v4.14.0-2581
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory (Important: OpenShift Virtualization 4.14.0 Images security and bug fix update), and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2023:6817