> Rather than addressing the clear premise of how you'd respond to sweeping, arrogant, and unsupported criticism by arrogant laypeople
Except I did address that in the next sentence[1]. Maybe you should read my comments before you write all this and accuse me of not reading yours.
> Thought so.
> The default state of UI design is not adding anything unless it adds something specific and justifiable and doesn't kill any other sort of accessibility
I did actually explain why it is not appropriate (that it communicates something specific which is contradictory to the way I often see it used). I'll add that it feels much worse than the native form widgets in websites where I often see it used, and it can degrade usability by being a non-standard input method. I also should point out that the null hypothesis doesn't need explaining. You've said yourself that the default state is not adding something, i.e. assume it is not appropriate until there is evidence to the contrary. The burden of proof is on you, and that is why I didn't deem that sentence worthy of specific reply.
> In this comment section, literally zero of the very critical people, you included, has responded with anything aside from some combination of personal preference
I don't control the actions of other people. That said, I did as you asked yesterday and looked it up, and the only study I could find said users didn't like toggles[2][3]. Wherever toggles are compared to binary non-toggle options, the other options are preferred though there is a degree of subjectivity to it. The only reason I didn't post it is because I assumed you were already familiar with the literature on the matter.
> Your refusal to acknowledge all of this doesn't oblige me to gather empirical evidence to defend it.
If it is as easy as you claim, it would be a lot less effort than writing all this and it would actually convince me you are correct (which I assume is your objective but it may not be). That seems like a much better option than calling me egotistical and stupid.
[1] "If the people making these claims were incorrect about something, I would simply explain why that is rather than saying "I have a bunch of experience that you don't have and there are some studies that prove your silly little feelings wrong. Your opinions are worthless compared to mine."" - James K (2024)
[2] Plaisant, C., & Wallace, D. (1990). Touchscreen toggle switches: Push or slide? Design issues and usability study (CS-TR-2557, CAR-TR-521). University of Maryland.
[3] Alyaa Al-Jasim and Pietro Murano. 2023. Designing User Interface Toggles for Usability. J. User Exper. 18, 4 (August 2023), 175–199.
Those would be great citations of we were talking about that. This entire conversation and the article it's responding to are discussing UI animation and not the merit of any given UI widget. You're obviously just going to just keep claiming that whatever you kicked the ball into is the goal, so I'm washing my hands of this pedantic mess. Enjoy.
The fact that users prefer a non-animated widget to an animated one seems exceedingly relevant my statement that users prefer widgets that react instantly over animated ones. I would even call it a strengthened goal. If you accept this conclusion, then I have shown more than I needed to prove.
Except I did address that in the next sentence[1]. Maybe you should read my comments before you write all this and accuse me of not reading yours.
> Thought so.
> The default state of UI design is not adding anything unless it adds something specific and justifiable and doesn't kill any other sort of accessibility
I did actually explain why it is not appropriate (that it communicates something specific which is contradictory to the way I often see it used). I'll add that it feels much worse than the native form widgets in websites where I often see it used, and it can degrade usability by being a non-standard input method. I also should point out that the null hypothesis doesn't need explaining. You've said yourself that the default state is not adding something, i.e. assume it is not appropriate until there is evidence to the contrary. The burden of proof is on you, and that is why I didn't deem that sentence worthy of specific reply.
> In this comment section, literally zero of the very critical people, you included, has responded with anything aside from some combination of personal preference
I don't control the actions of other people. That said, I did as you asked yesterday and looked it up, and the only study I could find said users didn't like toggles[2][3]. Wherever toggles are compared to binary non-toggle options, the other options are preferred though there is a degree of subjectivity to it. The only reason I didn't post it is because I assumed you were already familiar with the literature on the matter.
> Your refusal to acknowledge all of this doesn't oblige me to gather empirical evidence to defend it.
If it is as easy as you claim, it would be a lot less effort than writing all this and it would actually convince me you are correct (which I assume is your objective but it may not be). That seems like a much better option than calling me egotistical and stupid.
[1] "If the people making these claims were incorrect about something, I would simply explain why that is rather than saying "I have a bunch of experience that you don't have and there are some studies that prove your silly little feelings wrong. Your opinions are worthless compared to mine."" - James K (2024)
[2] Plaisant, C., & Wallace, D. (1990). Touchscreen toggle switches: Push or slide? Design issues and usability study (CS-TR-2557, CAR-TR-521). University of Maryland.
[3] Alyaa Al-Jasim and Pietro Murano. 2023. Designing User Interface Toggles for Usability. J. User Exper. 18, 4 (August 2023), 175–199.