Really bad UX with long name content type

Authors & Editors
1

Hi,

I’ve created a number of content type with long name. For the editor the experience is really bad because the Web app trim the name.

This is a few examples:

contentful-bad-ux
contentful-bad-ux.png1029×736 107 KB

As frontend designer and developer I think that UX is the firs aspect to study in an Web application.

Vincenzo

2

Hi @vmilone

Thanks a lot for your feedback! Am I right those screenshots are taken from tablet/mobile? It looks like long content type names look good when on desktop

11
Screen Shot 2017-09-25 at 14.26.11.png1417×400 29.9 KB

However, I completely agree with you. This looks a bit confusing (even for mobile web). Passing your feedback to the team.

3

Hi @andrey,

the screenshot is taken on my Macbook 13’’

I really enjoy that you listen to community proposals.

Vincenzo

4

@vmilone Sure! Thank you for helping me investigate the issue!
I actually tried on 15" monitors and was not able to reproduce it. I suspect it’s not only a matter of screen resolution. Digging deeper. Do you see it in all browsers?
Also, there are several places where the problem with long content type names could be potentially reproduced, i.e. when you Add entry, when link entry and etc. Could you please let me know how exactly you link the entry (as it’s seen from your screenshot), step by step?

5

The problem is the same with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 and Firefox 55.0.3 on my Macbook Pro Retina 13,3’’ (2560x1600).

Firefox screenshot:

37
Schermata 2017-09-27 alle 09.53.37.png2784×1770 524 KB

About your question:
First image is about adding an entry in “bulk editing” clicking on “Create new entry and link” and then using the “Add entry” button on the up-right. The second image is the list of entries created with this strategy. The result is the same if I create an entry directly from “Content” view, then I duplicate the entry and finally linking the entries into container entry with “Link existing entries”. If you want I can share a video of my screen while I reproduce the issue.

6

I just tested this and I’m not able to recreate your first issue; this is what I see:

image
image.png782×356 27 KB

but your second issue I am able to recreate:

image
image.png1818×436 28.8 KB

@vmilone can you test it again and let us know if you’re still experiencing the first issue? and we will pass the second issue to our product team in charge of the webapp.

Thanks for your feedback!

7

@charlie there is an interesting thing about the first issue- I was able to reproduce it on latest Chrome with additional display. Cannot reproduce it when just on Mac. Reported to the Team.
@vmilone And the second one is a bit tricky. See attached:

27
Screen Shot 2017-09-28 at 21.21.27.png2092×1050 170 KB

So, on Content list it’s also shown this way. So, basically there is aways a chance that any value (Content type, Name, Updated etc) could be very long and will not fit the row OR reference pane (if it’s a reference field). Current approach aims to prevent from overwhelming and keep the row readable. But I agree, it’d be great if even long names can be readable.
Passing this feedback to the Team.

8

Hi,

the problem is still here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B97YA2bXEPqJMXprT0xJbm5VZkk/view?usp=sharing

Vincenzo

1 Like
9

@vmilone Thank you! Perfect, I was able to reproduce it. Sorry, looks like we missed condition with Bulk editing. In that particular case it reproduces always. In other cases when there is Add entry dialog- it reproduces rarely and it depends on other conditions.
That’s great. I’ve added this to the bug report.

Thanks a lot!