I use Custom Fields a lot, always by means of Enzymes, for managing the code snippets I’m going to comment about.

The Custom Fields section inside the post editing page shows added custom fields in a table whose columns change their width to fit the content, but the rows don’t change their height. I do not like that design: a definition list is much better than a table there. The key is the definition term and the value is the definition data.

Here are some pictures about the results of my experiment. The first row is my restyling, and the second row is how the same data appear in the usual design. There are three custom fields already added to this post: snippet1, snippet2, and snippet3; in the right picture, a new google custom field is going to be added

customfields1.png , customfields2.png , customfieldsnew.png

customfieldsold.png

Features of my restyling
  • added fields and the new field are evenly represented by the classical definition list style, where definition data is indented below the definition term; this provides a powerful clue for identifying the key / value roles, thus making all the labels superfluous
  • space usage is smarter; the key spans all the available width; the value almost all of it, and its height is greater than usual too, thus allowing for a convenient inspection, for viewing and editing purposes; the vertical scrollbar is much more useful than the horizontal one
  • by clicking its key, a custom field gets expanded, thus showing its value and its two editing buttons, while the rest of the custom fields gets collapsed; showing only one custom field at a time helps keeping user’s attention focused
  • the selection box for chosing an already known-to-the-system key is replaced by a list of buttons, located above the key field; by clicking any of them, the key gets copied into the key field, so that the user can leave it alone or change it, if needed; the overall design is more coherent