I am curious to see if any other research was considered for this substantial of a decision? I was expecting to see comparisons or acknowledgements to Fitts’s Law, Jakob’s Law, or the Gutenberg Diagram, all three of which address how users parse information and associate the “end” of a page or window with the bottom right.
Can you go into further detail as to why we’re going against so many precedents, based on limited feedback? What problem are we trying to solve here that hasn’t already been solved? Let’s not try to reinvent how pages have evolved to read naturally.
Perhaps the largest offense is reversing the order of Next | Back | Cancel in the wizard component. Why is PatternFly digging in on the basis that the primary action must always come first, if it breaks how we comprehend progression (beginning : end :: left : right)?
By this reasoning, PatternFly breaks it’s own rule in being universal as the web browsers’ own navigation buttons appear as Back | Forward, not the other way around.