Translation UX/Design feedback 4

The goal of this round was to test:
 * The prototype for a translation homepage
 * The current implementation of the translate editor

Test with User #55 on 7 Jan
The user is a Hebrew speaker.

Test 1: Homepage

 * 00:55: The first element to call the user attention is the sign-up form.
 * 01:00: The user understands how to disable the default selection for languages and how to add more.
 * 02:10: When the user is asked to correct a translation, the search bar is immediately identified for the purpose.
 * 02:50: The user finds it clear how to become a translator.
 * 03:28: When asked about the list of projects, the user comment they look like placeholders.
 * 03:40: The user discovers the "translate" and "proofread" actions but not immediately, and finds the progress bars are "helpful information".
 * 04:20: The user understands the statistics in the tiles.
 * 05:00: The user comments that she is familiar with translatewiki but not an advanced user.

Test 2: Translation workflow

 * 07:30: The user has difficulties to identify where can find material for translation.
 * 08:26: The user access the language statistics page to find projects to be translated.
 * 11:04: The filters provided for the message table are understood (even the change of fuzzy for "updated")
 * 11:38: The loading indicator placeholder made the user think that she had to wait.
 * 12:32: The user finds a suggestion immediately and considers it to be a "perfect match" for the text to translate.
 * The layout seems clear and easy to process by the user.
 * The outdated warning was displayed by mistake.
 * 12:42: The user cannot save which creates some confusion about the workflow: "Did I saved? It's not clear"...
 * 14:47: ..and asks whether clicking twice is needed each time.
 * 15:40: The user comments that the layout is clear in general. The user comments that initially though the text to be translated was the message above. This is probably an issue due to the combination of texts in different directions (the user makes use of a Hebrew UI and the text to translate is in English) so the message to translate is not aligned with the translation.
 * 16:10: The expand button is not clear for the user. Once it was tried it was misinterpreted as "previous".
 * 16:43: The user has a doubt for the translation of a specific word and comments that concordance search is needed to understand how to translate this word in a specific context.
 * Access to glossary and translation for specific words/fragments is suggested by the user as a possible solution.
 * 19:22: The user wonders why suggestions with a higher percentage match apear below others with a worse percentage.
 * 19:21: Since the "outdated" warning is shown for all messages by mistake, the user wonders why the "show differences" option.
 * 20:08: The user skips a message because of lack of context information for the message.
 * 20:38: The user saves and goes to the next message, which is the expected behavior for the user.
 * 21:16: The user finds a word for which she was not sure how to translate, checks a dictionary and updates the former translation.
 * 25:32: The user finds the UI "pretty similar to the existing interface".
 * 26:10: When asked about the possibility of asking a question, the user does not consider that as a frequent option. Nevertheless, the user is able to access to the support forum from the editor.
 * 28:50: The user is able to identify which project she is translating and is able to navigate to a different project.
 * 30:00: The user comments that normally translates some specific project because in this way you can get familiar with the terminology.
 * 32:00: The user is able to explore the hierarchy of message groups.
 * 33:55: The user asks about the meaning of the blue line to confirm that it means "translated" since she found a group of messages she did not expected to be completely translated to Hebrew.
 * 34:54: When the user is asked about the "load all messages", the user understands the behavior.
 * 36:04: The user comments that she was aware that the project list was searchable but she did not used
 * 36:50: the user comments that the UI is "cleaner and neat" but was expecting some additional functionality but functionality-wise is quite similar to the current UI.
 * Considers "concordance search" a must.