Asking for a date of birth (2013)
designnotes.blog.gov.uk
designnotes.blog.gov.uk
For example, I want to buy Quake on the Nintendo eShop. The website wants to know my age in order to show me a age restricted game. So it will always ask me the age same question even if I have already answered hundred of times. So does Steam and many other websites. Is this a by-product of some compliance or self-regulatory requirement like ESRB?
If not, it would make much more sense to just ask a yes/no question for the age criteria. Usually this argument is answered with "what about fraud?". Well, asking the birthday is no guarantee at all that the birthday is correct. It only adds friction.
As a small revenge I always use an absurdly old birth date on these forms. This way if they are collecting this data, my input will be discarded or pollute their datasets.
Yes, Steam addressed this an announcement a few years ago:
> Q: Why do you KEEP asking my damn age throughout the store?
> A: We're with you on this. Unfortunately, many rating agencies have rules that stipulate that we cannot save your age for longer than a single browsing session. It's frustrating, but know we're filling out those age gates too.
https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail...
The term of art seems to be "neutral age gate", and something like a checkbox to indicate you're under 13 is explicitly not OK according to FTC guidance. So where it's to comply with government regulations, this is not enough.
https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/complying-co...
Or the micro-frauds get detected, linked to your credit card & email address, your identity, and credit rating. Before you know it, your transactions are failing fraud checks, you can't get loans, and BigTechs unilaterally cancel your accounts.
I exaggerate, but I fear we may be heading in that direction.
You don't think BigTech ever cancel accounts being used by regular people?
You don't think companies ever share data with each other to make decisions about whether a transaction might be fraudulent?
[01] [Jan] [1970]
where [01]: one- or two-digit day, typed manually
[Jan]: three-letter month, picked from a dropdown
[1970]: four-digit year, typed manually
I think this is a good (the best?) presentation.By using a manual day entry instead of providing a dropdown, as the programmer you can avoid requiring client-side logic to restrict the number of days displayed in the dropdown based on the chosen month and year (e.g. 31 for Jan., 28/29 for Feb., etc.).
Having the month represented in letters, not numbers, minimizes the chances of user confusion between `dd-mm` and `mm-dd` presentations.
The year presentation matches the one in the OP article.
I don't think so. It has problems with i18n. For example, the abbreviation for December is "Dic" in spanish and "Dez" in German, not "Dec" as in english.
For other dates though maybe, since most wouldn't have all month numbers memorized, but I’d still say typed, only with a variation on month name (you should be able to parse both abbreviated and full, so long as you know their locale) is better all the time.
It wasn't an issue, but a minor annoyance to fix it every time I traveled, so that it matched my travel documents.
Until a couple of years ago, when I was traveling back from Germany and the flight crew thought it would be nice to surprise me with a bottle of champagne at midnight on my "birthday".
They were so proud of doing this over the top "random kindness" (it was pretty thoughtful), and couldn't figure out why I was confused and annoyed. I still feel bad for not acting more excited or grateful...
Yes, I know, historically it was.
I don't know why, but I can easily map 1-6 to Jan-Jun. And I can easily map 9-12 with Sep-Dec. But July and August always trip me up.
Jan01, Fev02, Mar03, Apr04, May05, Jun06, Jul07, Ago08, Sep09, Oct10, Nov11, Dec12
(In the present case, a UK Government website might well have a legitimate reason.)
Well Zoom locked him out for some time for trying to lie I guess and that meeting had to be moved to Teams.
https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-design-system-backlog/issu...
On iOS choosing year/month is the rolodex interface, as slow and clunky as usual, especially if you’re flipping it for 40~60 years.
On android it moves month by month at most, so it’s even funnier to swipe for decades.
I think the type=number alternative with validation + confirmation text with the month in letters is a better choice.
On Pixel (android 12), it opens a scrolling list, temporarily replacing the calendar month/day view.
I want to be able to do things like
<input type=date widget="calendarpicker">
<input type=date widget="mmddyypicker">
<input type=date widget="mycustomcomponent">
so you're stuck with not great UX if the platform-specific picker sucks for your use-case which for this is absolutely does. If you're born in 1950 on iOS have fun spinning the year wheel for a while instead of just typing in the number.That's why so many people roll their own.
I was wondering why you chose to use the placeholder attribute to show labels rather than the (afaik recommended) usage of showing example values. The form shows example values, but outside the input fields. Did you test both ways and this turned out to be better after all, or this was just an implementation which worked fine in testing so it stuck?
If there is even less information available the same goes for the month of the year. I have seen passports where people are born on 0-0-1970
Must be a frustrating situation in many software systems.
Relying on input=date would probably abstract that away at the client side, but as people said, browser support for it still seems to be bad.
Just put it in the example below...
You wouldn't have to list off all of the years, and no typing which could be helpful for people with disability or mobility concerns.
Birthday (yyyymmdd):
I'll argue that there's a nontrivial overlap between the users who fail to do this correctly, and those that would cause me support related grief later.
That way is easier to use on mobile, faster for all use cases on the desktop.
Not consistent for someone who uses lots of different sites on one device. There are about seven billion of those.
"Consistent experience across devices" is not just a waste of time, it's actively harmful.
(D)D/MM(M)/YYYY