When designing a user interface for an application that is going to be used internationally it is possible to accidentally design an aspect of the UI that is offensive to or inappropriate in another culture.
Have you ever encountered such an issue and if so, how did you resolve the design problem?
Some examples:
Please ensure that any reply you add to this question is as culturally sensitive as the user interfaces we're all trying to build! Thanks.
Diversity in the design of the built environment is vital because it may better enable the designer to empathise with and relate to the requirements of a wider spread of communities.
To be effective, designers need to consider not only language differences, but cultural tendencies, values, customs, and taboos.
The tolerance principle: The design should be flexible and tolerant, reducing the cost of mistakes and misuse by allowing undoing and redoing, while also preventing errors wherever possible by tolerating varied inputs and sequences and by interpreting all reasonable actions reasonable.
You should try to follow the i18n and l10n pointers provided by the look and feel guidelines for the UI library you're using, or platform you're delivering to. They often contain hints on how to avoid cultural issues, and may even contain icon libraries that have had extensive testing for such potential banana skins.
I guess the most important thing is designing your application with i18n in mind from the ground up, so that your UI can be resized depending on the translated text; mnemonics are appropriate for different languages; labels are to the left for latin languages, but on the right for Hebrew and Arabic, etc, etc.
Designing with i18n and l10n in mind means that shipping your product to a location with a different culture, language or currency will not require a re-write, or a different version, just different resources.
Generally speaking, I believe you'll run into more problems with graphics and icons that you will with text (apart from embarrassing translations) simply because people identify more strongly with symbols than particular passages of text.
The idiom to use a big (green) checkmark symbol to mean OK/Yes/Correct is somewhat confusing in Sweden, where the checkmark is typically used to mean "wrong". I.e. when grading tests in school, a teacher will often use a capital R (from the Swedish word for "Right") for a correct answer, and a checkmark ("bock" in Swedish) for "wrong".
I find this issue interesting not only because I'm in the affected group (I'm Swedish), but also because it highlights that these kinds of issues can appear where you might not expect them to. Sweden is a generic Western culture, you might assume that usage of these kinds of symbols should be the same.
Another Yes/No example for Japan
I have to use an online database tool that has some user settings that can be toggled on and off. On is indicated by a green cross (×), Off is indicated by a red circle (○).
In Japan this is confusing since Off (NG, stop, closed) in general would be indicated by a cross (× : batsu) and On (ok, open) by a circle (○ : maru). Adding to that the green red color combination makes things very confusing.
There is a good reason why the Windows resources (and not only) contain more than just strings. A lot of elements should be considered localizable: - colors - images (including icons, toolbars, etc.) - sounds - font and font sizes - alignment - control flags and attributes (think UI mirroring for Arabic & Hebrew) - dialog sizes - etc.
This way all most of the problems can be addressed by the localizers, without any code changes.
For dialogs resizing should either be done by the localizers (to leaving extra space is not necessary), or should use auto-layout (available in frameworks like Java, .NET, Flex, wxWidgets, Qt, etc.)
This might also be a good read: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/goglobal/bb688120.aspx
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With