in reply to RFC: Algorithm::CouponCode

Nicely done.   I would also suggest of course that the range of characters used in the codes omit certain characters such as “Oh” and “El” and “Ess” so that substitutes zero, one, and five (respectively) can be automagically substituted.

I would further suggest that the text be as large as you can make it, and that the difference between acceptable and unacceptable responses be more than “red and green.”   My dad, and a couple of my aunts(!), could not tell the difference between the two colors.   (They drove into one town where the traffic lights were inexplicably mounted upside-down and almost had a wreck.   The same thing happened when the lights were mounted sideways.   Clues such as texture, or a background difference such as a red “X” vs. a green “check-mark,” are also helpful.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Algorithm::CouponCode
by grantm (Parson) on Apr 07, 2011 at 21:23 UTC

    Unless I misunderstand your first paragraph, I am already doing that.

    The issue you raise with the accessibility issues for Red/Green is a very good point. I might experiment with your cross/check-mark suggestion.

    Thanks

Re^2: RFC: Algorithm::CouponCode
by ambrus (Abbot) on Apr 08, 2011 at 17:02 UTC
    There is some difference between accepted and rejected parts apart from the color: if the part of the code is accepted, the javascript automatically selects the next input field, and the code you just entered is uppercased and "O" is changed to "0". Still, some other indication for a mistyped part might not hurt.
Re^2: RFC: Algorithm::CouponCode
by grantm (Parson) on May 19, 2011 at 21:32 UTC
    I finally got time to look at the whole red/green visual feedback issue. The new version has updated Javascript+CSS to include a tick/cross icons as per your suggestion - thanks.