The fact that a file reaches the system does not necessarily mean that it has been accepted or reviewed. When designing the installation flow with a freelance interface design expert, it is necessary to show these stages separately. The user must be able to understand what process is finished and what is expected of him/her.
Explain the rules before the file is selected
Supported formats, size limit, and whether multiple files can be added should be visible. If there is a sample document required, provide a brief explanation. The user must be prevented from waiting the entire loading time only to find out that he/she has selected an inappropriate file.
Separate transport from validation
The 100 percent loading indicator can only mean that the transfer is over. If file processing or control is in progress, clearly indicate the new status. Uploaded, accepted, and approved are different states. Failing on more than one file should not require re-selecting the others.
Associate the review result with the file
For missing or incorrect documents, give an explanation next to the relevant file instead of a general warning. The user must know which version to replace. When the file is refreshed, the status of previous comments and whether re-review is required should also be defined in the flow.
Brief check before delivery
- Do file conditions appear before selection?
- Are transfer and review statuses separate?
- Does the error match the specific file and version?
Clarify scope with Selçuk Aker
When working with Selçuk Aker, you can consider these decisions within the scope of administration panel design. For the first meeting, share existing files, usage environment, and target delivery date. API linked screen states completes this preparation.
Frequently asked questions
Is the progress bar necessary in all cases?
It is useful in long transfers. Accurate status information should be given instead of showing a technically immeasurable progress with a fake percentage.
If one file fails should they all be reloaded?
If the system supports it, trying again only the failed file requires less effort.
Should the new version replace the old file?
It depends on the workflow. Clear rules should define retention of previous versions and migration of comments.
