Selecting text, a core functionality of a computer, is pointless?
Can you identify any OS GUI in history that offered text selection without operations to perform on the selection?
That was always the core function: select the input of an operation.
Some of us struggle with long lines of text (people with varying degrees of dyslexia)
There are solutions for that: accessibility standards.
It’s been well researched and is basic to good UI design.
All the problems you point out leading you to do something extra just to read indicate problems addressed by fixing broken accessibility.
It’d be better to fix those basic UI problems instead of defend doing extra things we shouldn’t have to do that they weren’t really designed to do.
Yes, practically all the desktop ones. You can just select text with it just selecting the text. On most websites. I’m pretty sure OP is referring to websites that “helpfully” put UI elements in the way after highlighting.
Most text editors do this well, they put the UI elements above the text, not in the way.
The vast, vast, majority of websites still do nothing when you select text.
We’re not talking about phones, you typically read that in portrait so the lines are short.
Perhaps I have made an assumption that not everyone was on the same page about.
Selecting text on android also works great with the UI that pops up there. I’m pretty sure we’re only talking about annoying websites, on desktop.
Can you identify any OS GUI in history that offered text selection without operations to perform on the selection? without operations without
I doubt any early OS designer went “Pure selection is useful on its own. Let’s ship that without the ability to do anything to it.” then at a later iteration someone went “I have a clever idea: let’s add the ability to operate (eg, cut, copy, overwrite) on that selection!”.
Even the name is suggestive: select.
Select for what?
Input for something.
It still seems like a criticism that picks over the wrong thing while disregarding a host of deeper problems (eg, noncompliance with accessibility standards) that led them there.
Reading is basic: the text size, spacing, line length, contrast should be accessible without extra steps.
Font ought to be adjustable from their user agent, so dyslexic users can set a dyslexic font.
Selection popovers shouldn’t obscure the selection.
Etc.
Yes, without operations visible. Highlighting text just highlights it on the vast majority of websites on desktop, right now. Unless you’re on edge, where it does obscure as soon as you let go of the mouse.
You need to right click, or use keyboard shortcuts to do anything with your highlighted text, unless your browser is getting in the way. Some websites do also get in the way.
And this is exactly what the OP wants (or rather my interpretation):
Selection popovers shouldn’t obscure the selection. Etc.
Other programs do this far better. The key complaint is that popups pop up in front of the text.
You need to right click, or use keyboard shortcuts to do anything with your highlighted text, unless your browser is getting in the way. Some websites do also get in the way.
You’re willfully misreading: those operations are available.
The illustrative story
I doubt any early OS designer went “Pure selection is useful on its own. Let’s ship that without the ability to do anything to it.”
should have made the question clear.
You can’t name a single OS now or in history where pure selection is possible yet no operations on the selection are available.
It always existed for the sake of enabling operations on selections and never for its own sake.
That it’s an abortable, multistep process is beside the point: aborting it every time isn’t the purpose.
You’re taking an incidental part of the design that was always a dependency for something else & treating it as a feature unto itself, which it never was.
The use case for pure selection is fairly weak.
As stated before, it’s a fair question whether the underlying issue (whatever leads people to purely select text) isn’t better addressed by accessibility (a design that doesn’t tempt them to purely text selection).
In any case, an accessible design wouldn’t obscure selections.
I think we’ve had a big misunderstanding here, partly because I got annoyed for you calling something others use as pointless.
I’m not trying to argue that NOTHING other than text selection should be possible. That would be annoying. From my very first comment is said people highlight to copy text. The very first one. Just that this incidental “feature” of temporarily highlighting text is clearly a useful one. People DO want to just select the text sometimes. But also copy, search, whatever.
Just because you don’t use text selection this way, doesn’t mean it isn’t useful. (The reason I got annoyed at you calling it “pointless”, though, I see now this is because of a misunderstanding)
Hell, I do it not only for myself, but when sharing my screen at work, and pointing out specific pieces of text. Makes it very easy to quickly bring my colleagues eyes to the specific spot I’m talking about in the text.
You can’t name a single OS now or in history where pure selection is possible yet no operations on the selection are available
This isn’t what I’m arguing. Non-copyable text is a great sin. But there are plenty of programs that don’t offer a pop-up, off the top of my head: Bluebeam Revu, Notepad++, many web browsers (but as mentioned, not Edge who’s implementation of popup options sucks and gets in the way), the list goes on.
I am not against all popups, just the ones that prevent you from reading the text you just highlighted.
This isn’t even just an accessibility thing, getting in the way of the text you highlighted is just annoying.
Can you identify any OS GUI in history that offered text selection without operations to perform on the selection? That was always the core function: select the input of an operation.
There are solutions for that: accessibility standards. It’s been well researched and is basic to good UI design.
All the problems you point out leading you to do something extra just to read indicate problems addressed by fixing broken accessibility. It’d be better to fix those basic UI problems instead of defend doing extra things we shouldn’t have to do that they weren’t really designed to do.
Yes, practically all the desktop ones. You can just select text with it just selecting the text. On most websites. I’m pretty sure OP is referring to websites that “helpfully” put UI elements in the way after highlighting.
Most text editors do this well, they put the UI elements above the text, not in the way.
The vast, vast, majority of websites still do nothing when you select text.
We’re not talking about phones, you typically read that in portrait so the lines are short.
Perhaps I have made an assumption that not everyone was on the same page about.
Selecting text on android also works great with the UI that pops up there. I’m pretty sure we’re only talking about annoying websites, on desktop.
Seems the question was misread.
I doubt any early OS designer went “Pure selection is useful on its own. Let’s ship that without the ability to do anything to it.” then at a later iteration someone went “I have a clever idea: let’s add the ability to operate (eg, cut, copy, overwrite) on that selection!”. Even the name is suggestive: select. Select for what? Input for something.
It still seems like a criticism that picks over the wrong thing while disregarding a host of deeper problems (eg, noncompliance with accessibility standards) that led them there. Reading is basic: the text size, spacing, line length, contrast should be accessible without extra steps. Font ought to be adjustable from their user agent, so dyslexic users can set a dyslexic font. Selection popovers shouldn’t obscure the selection. Etc.
Yes, without operations visible. Highlighting text just highlights it on the vast majority of websites on desktop, right now. Unless you’re on edge, where it does obscure as soon as you let go of the mouse.
You need to right click, or use keyboard shortcuts to do anything with your highlighted text, unless your browser is getting in the way. Some websites do also get in the way.
And this is exactly what the OP wants (or rather my interpretation):
Other programs do this far better. The key complaint is that popups pop up in front of the text.
You’re willfully misreading: those operations are available.
The illustrative story
should have made the question clear.
You can’t name a single OS now or in history where pure selection is possible yet no operations on the selection are available. It always existed for the sake of enabling operations on selections and never for its own sake. That it’s an abortable, multistep process is beside the point: aborting it every time isn’t the purpose. You’re taking an incidental part of the design that was always a dependency for something else & treating it as a feature unto itself, which it never was. The use case for pure selection is fairly weak.
As stated before, it’s a fair question whether the underlying issue (whatever leads people to purely select text) isn’t better addressed by accessibility (a design that doesn’t tempt them to purely text selection). In any case, an accessible design wouldn’t obscure selections.
I think we’ve had a big misunderstanding here, partly because I got annoyed for you calling something others use as pointless.
I’m not trying to argue that NOTHING other than text selection should be possible. That would be annoying. From my very first comment is said people highlight to copy text. The very first one. Just that this incidental “feature” of temporarily highlighting text is clearly a useful one. People DO want to just select the text sometimes. But also copy, search, whatever.
Just because you don’t use text selection this way, doesn’t mean it isn’t useful. (The reason I got annoyed at you calling it “pointless”, though, I see now this is because of a misunderstanding)
Hell, I do it not only for myself, but when sharing my screen at work, and pointing out specific pieces of text. Makes it very easy to quickly bring my colleagues eyes to the specific spot I’m talking about in the text.
This isn’t what I’m arguing. Non-copyable text is a great sin. But there are plenty of programs that don’t offer a pop-up, off the top of my head: Bluebeam Revu, Notepad++, many web browsers (but as mentioned, not Edge who’s implementation of popup options sucks and gets in the way), the list goes on.
I am not against all popups, just the ones that prevent you from reading the text you just highlighted.
This isn’t even just an accessibility thing, getting in the way of the text you highlighted is just annoying.