Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

update verbiage for better Backorder display / understanding #2830

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 14, 2017

Conversation

kieckhafer
Copy link
Member

Resolves #2828

The terminology used on the PDP in relation to Backorders / inventory is confusing, seemingly displaying the opposite of what is actually happening.

This update simply reverses the display of a toggle switch to show the opposite boolean value, which helps decipher what's actually going on for the end-user.

@rymorgan
Copy link
Contributor

This makes sense to me.

@mikemurray
Copy link
Member

Maybe instead of reversing the value, we can ensure that when the switch is on it's true regardless of what ever the initial boolean value was that was supplied to it?

Not sure re-reversing the value the switch provided, which was already reversed, makes this less confusing.

@spencern
Copy link
Contributor

spencern commented Sep 12, 2017

@mikemurray that's how it was intended to work originally, but would involve changing the language back to something similar to "Deny when out of stock" as is still listed as the label for the schema.

To me this is a copy/ux issue and not a schema or engineering one. The schema copies Shopify (and other platforms) terminology of having an option to Deny ordering/adding-to-cart of products that are out-of-stock.

Exactly how we communicate that to users is more of a @aaronjudd / @sophiehe question.

@mikemurray
Copy link
Member

@spencern makes sense. 👍

is the same as `handleCheckboxChange`.
*/

const reverseValue = !value;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nitpicky but I'd prefer inverseValue

Copy link
Contributor

@spencern spencern left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Merging this as it fixes an issue and isn't changing the verbiage in this PR, just fixing what currently exists.
If necessary we can open another issue to discuss the verbiage around this functionality.

@spencern spencern merged commit 9f69725 into marketplace Sep 14, 2017
@spencern spencern deleted the ek-reverseBackorderVerbiage branch September 14, 2017 05:42
@spencern spencern mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants