Room list filters inconsistent with EX

[kongo09]

Your use case

What would you like to do?

Filter the room list

Why would you like to do it?

Get quick access to the relevant rooms

How would you like to achieve it?

Use the filter pills above the room list

What do you expect?

Consistency between EX and Web

• same copy, e.g. unreads vs. unread or favourites vs. favorites
• same order from EX: unreads, people, rooms, favorites
• same scope: EW missing invites
• no linebreak in EW for narrow room lists
• leading X to clear all filters

What do you experience?

Web

EX

Teams avoiding the linebreak by using a chevron

Have you considered any alternatives?

No response

Additional context

No response

[daniellekirkwood]

Thanks, Patrick!

same copy, e.g. unreads vs. unread or favourites vs. favorites

Great catch, this should be really easy to fix Unread > Unreads. Will raise with team.
The spelling of Favourites should be British English (with the U) - we will need to raise that with the EX team.

same order from EX: unreads, people, rooms, favorites

Gaelle specifically asked that we have the filters on web in the order they are currently in because Unreads and Favourites are probably going to be the most used...

@amshakal I agree with PA that the filters should match in their order -- which is the cross-platform order we should go with?

same scope: EW missing invites

EX has an Invites filter? Does it only show when you have one?

no linebreak in EW for narrow room lists

EW does have a line break - it doesn't have the expansion like MS. Gaelle was very against this solution (I think Design was as a whole against this). @amshakal wdyt?

leading X to clear all filters

Similarly, Design didn't want to introduce the X on web, and then chose to implement single-select filters - I forget the reasons why but know they were discussed.

[MidhunSureshR]

We have more filters (secondary) that are not yet exposed in the UI:

[daniellekirkwood]

The text has been changed.

We need a UX decision on whether to change the order of the pills to match on mobile, @amshakal / @americanrefugee wdyt?

[americanrefugee]

We need a UX decision on whether to change the order of the pills to match on mobile, @amshakal / @americanrefugee wdyt?

Yes, I think they should be ordered like on mobile.

[dbkr]

I've made #29666 for this, assuming design agree with this change.

[giomfo]

@daniellekirkwood would it be possible to have Favourites filter in the collapsed version of the filters?

Currently "Rooms" is useless for my point of view, as a user I would prefer have "Favourites"

[florianduros]

@giomfo this is consistent with EX

We moved it in #29957 to match EX order

[giomfo]

We should perhaps change EX filter order ;) cc @mxandreas

[americanrefugee]

We should perhaps change EX filter order ;) cc @mxandreas

Welp, Favourites is useless for some people (like me) since they never favourite anything. This is one of those things where everyone is going to have a different preference of ordering.

IF we want to make the filter ordering perfect for everyone, then the only solution would be to allow them to be dragged into place on both EW and EX. The advantages are obvious, but the disadvantages are:

• Drag-and-drop filters would be difficult to discover unless we explicitly call it out (like with a New Feature Announcement)
• This kind of interaction would be easy-ish for people on EW, but awkward for those using EX because of the horizontal scrolling (we might even need a different interaction altogether for mobile)
• I assume this will add dev effort all around

Happy to discuss further if anyone thinks this is important to explore :)