Research project name

Managing Sharing

Squad contact

Curtis Hovey

Date due

yyyy-mm-dd (unknown?)

Round

2

Number of people

5

UX recommendations

Designer comments

Squad leader comments

Changes agreed

Changes implemented

Notes

1. Copy change: Rename 'Policy type' to ‘Data type.’ From a user’s perspective, ‘Policy’ adds an extra level of potential complication.

eg:Make button red

eg:That has no implementation impact

'Data type' is fine.

None

Is 'Information type' better because the word is more natural: see the picture in http://blog.launchpad.net/general/reimagining-the-nature-of-privacy-in-launchpad-part-1 . We want to use this term consistently

2. Main interface functionality - Keep the same. Reasons: The new functionality of being able to change from all/some/none is intuitive and was easily understood by all.  Suggest keep this as it is.

blank

blank

agreed

blank

None

3. Move the search and share function to the position of the filter box. Change text from "+ Share" to something more intuitive, or change how this is displayed altogether so that the search box is displayed straight away. Reasons: Users assume the filter box is the search ‘Share’ function. This happened 4/5 times.  Users assumed the filter box was the search box and some were totally stumped when it didn’t work for search. Some users eventually found the search function under ‘Share,’ but this was more from trial and error.

blank

blank

Agreed, maybe "Share with someone"

blank

Bugs and branches use "Subscribe someone"

4. Move the filter box below the table results. Space occupied by the filter box at the moment would be better suited for the search function (see point 3). Filtering is something that users will do after looking through the table/changing settings, so having it sit below the table would make sense from a user's perspective.

blank

blank

Sinzui disagrees with the position because the user must scroll up to see the results. This is unnatural. No table in launchpad has it's form below it -- this will confuse users. See notes.

blank

"Filter users and teams" is misleading. It does not filter the information in the table as seen on first load, nor does it state what it is for. A better description of the action is "Audit sharing with user and teams" and this action changes the layout of the table to show indirect relationships (adds the Via column that shows team that is shared with) and shows a form to find specific relationships.

5. The filter system itself is confusing - Scale back the number of filter options. I think the scope of the filter box can be scaled down significantly. I don’t think ‘Policy/data type’ is necessary as this information is now clear without a filter due to the changes we’ve made to the main interface. ‘Some’ is still be useful for those who will be using this category a lot, roles may also help give a bit of extra insight if necessary.

blank

blank

agreed, but it is not clear what the solution is.

blank

There are three auditing cases: find a specific user, see all users in a specific policy, see just the exceptional users (Some). The rejected mockups suggest alternate ways to filter based on how the problem was solved by the person-picker, derivative-distro-differences, and bug columns.

6. Show/hide (disclosure triangle) functionality was missed. Suggest remove show/hide and have all options visible from the start, or add some text to make it clear that the filter function is there and what it's for.

blank

blank

Agreed that this is a problem

blank

This feature is really for the 13 member of https://launchpad.net/~pmteam/+members . Maybe we want this to be an action and we might want it to appear as a button. This could be described as a mode. The table is in summary mode be default and 99% of users will use it. 1% of users will use the audit mode

7. Red 'delete user' button - keep, well-liked and understood by all.

blank

blank

agreed

blank

None

8. Green 'add' additional policy type button - suggest move. This button was seen as a blocker to viewing the shared items, users assumed it would lead them to the 'view shared items' page and were frustrated when it did not. Suggest moving it to sit alongside the red 'delete user' button, as their functionality is related and roles are similar.

blank

blank

agreed

blank

sinzui is not sure what to do. Move the icon before the policy tags or maybe add the (i) icon to "View shared items" that was in previous mockups.

9. Green 'add' additional policy type button - suggest move. This button was seen as a blocker to viewing the shared items, users assumed it would lead them to the 'view shared items' page and were frustrated when it did not. Suggest moving it to sit alongside the red 'delete user' button, as their functionality is related and roles are similar.

blank

blank

blank

blank

Sinzui thinks that 9 is identical to 8.

10. Searching for an individual, eg: 'Mary' (A) Searching for an individual (in this case Mary) was difficult for all but one user during the tests. Everyone else failed in a number of different ways. Some people tried to find ‘Mary’ through the ‘standard’ search bar at the bottom of the page – this seemed to work once, but may have been a fluke, as it didn’t work a second time. (B) I’m a bit unclear about whether the ‘standard’ search bar working in this way was an intended part of this page? I would suggest we don't use it in this way anyway, as it takes the user from the main page and makes things a bit more complex. (C) I'm a bit confused about what the 'correct' way to do this is, and why users would want to do it, and how often, etc. Need to talk this point through before a solution can be suggested.

blank

blank

Agreed that this is a serious matter

blank

per the notes above, users need to know they are auditing. Maybe "Research" is a better verb in this example.

11. Move right-hand side overview box to sit alongside (side-by-side) the re-positioned search function. This box was ignored or lost by most users. Also, nobody picked up that the numbers were clickable – it’s pretty hard to see this as the text colours are so similar. Suggest to make clickable text green (as with similar clickable text in Launchpad) so it stands out.

blank

blank

agreed

blank

I think there might be confusion between the links. Maybe we do not want them to issue a search since the search feature is really an auditing/research feature. This changes the level of information shown, has to revel the form to audit users and the user might not know that they need to switch to summary mode to restore the previous view.

12. The term 'Some' caused some confusion - suggest extra help text. There was a bit of general confusion about this new category. Users were not sure what it was for, but then the majority of users would never use it/have used it, so perhaps it’s not surprising. Having “Some project information is shared via a bug or branch subscription,” as a mouse-over text pop-up would be a quick way to help users understand what this category is for, and if/when it is relevant to them.

blank

blank

Agreed

blank

We might want tooltips to show on hover; touch interfaces cannot hover though.