From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eduardo Mercovich Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Interactive guide for new users Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:48:02 -0300 Message-ID: <87ft7an6nh.fsf@mercovich.net> References: <87a6xlac0q.fsf@mercovich.net> <874knsn6if.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17013"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.3.3; emacs 27.1 Cc: self@gkayaalp.com, casouri@gmail.com, eliz@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Philip K." Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 22 00:23:25 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kKUDU-0004Hj-D8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 00:23:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45888 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKUDT-0007Hx-DM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:23:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKU6D-00060I-ON for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:15:55 -0400 Original-Received: from paulo.mayfirst.org ([162.247.75.97]:48463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKU69-00028K-TA; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:15:52 -0400 Original-Received: from paulo.mayfirst.org (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by paulo.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BD23F31; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:15:48 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: xxxxx) with ESMTPSA id 0AFB13F21 In-reply-to: <874knsn6if.fsf@posteo.net> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Received-SPF: none client-ip=162.247.75.97; envelope-from=eduardo@mercovich.net; helo=paulo.mayfirst.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/21 18:15:48 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:256303 Archived-At: Hi Philip. [...] >> Also, there should be a way to go back (not included in this rough >> draft). > Even with the ability to skip and go back, I still think that a total > newcomer won't be able to gain a lot from options like these. Maybe I'm > just bad, but in my case, I would skim over the text or wouldn't be too > interested in reading it in detail, to imagine what the differences > would be like. If anything, a visualisation would be needed. For example > in a separate window. I may think or not like you, but in this case it doesn't matter so much what we think, but rather what the expected users do. So I propose we should measure it with a prototype and a usability test. Than is, we don't need to really do it, just prototype (simulate) it and observe some Users using it. After the test we can probe for the reasons if the observed behaviour.=20 [...] >> Testing with users is one of my specialties, I would happily make a >> testing protocol before making the design, tests and development. In a >> way, it is like TDD, but with interaction design... > I'm not sure we're talking about the same testing here? I had more of a > "playground" like approach, where you can immediately or quickly see > what this option means, but I don't know if that's what you had in mind > too. The test I had in mind is the traditional usability test: we draw (even with text) the proposed screens, have people use them (a good sample qualitatively speaking, 5 to 7 is good to start), clear criteria for observations, and see what they understand and value from what they do.=20 As was said before, in the post-tasks interview, we can go deeper to understand what they understood and how they made their choices.=20 Based on that, we can make our design (*1) choices. :) Best... (*1): design not as visual design, but as "a process that gives form".=20 --=20 eduardo mercovich Donde se cruzan tus talentos=20 con las necesidades del mundo,=20 ah=C3=AD est=C3=A1 tu vocaci=C3=B3n.=20 (An=C3=B3nimo)