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 error pages #5131

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

AntonKhorev
Copy link
Collaborator

@AntonKhorev AntonKhorev commented Aug 30, 2024

You can debate what changes are needed on error pages. #5130 does some, referring to #3532, but that issue proposes some things I wouldn't agree with.

For comparison here's what I'd change.

image
image
image

@kcne
Copy link
Contributor

kcne commented Aug 30, 2024

Maybe also add a back to homepage link since it's not really visually clear and intuitive that clicking on OSM logo navigates to homepage.

@AntonKhorev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I looked at previous discussions and I'm a little surprised about this "back to homepage link". Why is is necessarily "back"? If I came to osm through a broken link and landed on the 404 page, I'm not going "back" to any homepage.

@kcne
Copy link
Contributor

kcne commented Aug 30, 2024

I appreciate your point about the term "back" possibly implying a prior visit to OSM, which might not always be the case.

However, the core issue here is user experience and intuitiveness. While a user might not be "going back" in all scenarios, the primary intent of a "back to homepage" link is to provide a clear and intuitive way to navigate to a familiar starting point—in this case OSM.

Clicking on the logo to return to the homepage is a common web convention, but it’s not universally understood by all users. Therefore, having a clearly labeled link offers an additional, explicit option for a broader range of users, including those who may not immediately recognize the logo as a navigational element.

It doesn't have to be named "back to homepage," but I still believe having a link that clearly navigates to openstreetmap.org is a good way to give users the option to continue to OSM, even if they landed on an error page.

@AntonKhorev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

having a clearly labeled link offers an additional, explicit option for a broader range of users

There's a different opinion in #1550 (comment), but it doesn't really matter for this PR because I'm not changing the text of the page. If you think an extra homepage link is necessary on the 404 page or on every error page, you can add it without doing anything I do here, unless you want this link styled as a Bootstrap button.

@nenad-vujicic
Copy link
Contributor

Honestly, adding URL for which an error occurred (unless #3876 is resolved) or Page URL + actions (user actions, not stack / call trace) after which error occurred sound much better option than home / root URL or leaving nothing? But, I agree this will take much more time and is not part of #5130 #5131 . I apologize if this is too off-topic.

@nenad-vujicic
Copy link
Contributor

Honestly, adding URL for which an error occurred (unless #3876 is resolved) or Page URL + actions (user actions, not stack / call trace) after which error occurred sound much better option than home / root URL or leaving nothing? But, I agree this will take much more time and is not part of #5130 #5131 . I apologize if this is too off-topic.

Also, perhaps we should move toward reporting errors through flash[] mechanism (i.e. using bootstrap alerts) and leave these super-simple error pages for fatal errors only? Again, I apologize for going off-topic, I would just like to read your thoughts.

@nertc
Copy link
Contributor

nertc commented Oct 4, 2024

Is there anything that prevents Bootstrap and common.scss to be used for the error pages? It would need less SCSS code, and it would be much more consistent.

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge" />
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know that these two lines were copied from the _head.html.erb, but for the consistency of this file, I think, it will be better if we use <%= tag.meta ... %> instead.

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