Topic on Talk:Talk pages project/Replying/Flow

phab:T255086: Present the Reply tool more smoothly

phab:T254208:Revise position and behavior of Reply tool's text input

phab:T254420: Consider revising visual mode's text formatting icons

phab:T255085: Clarify distinction between the Reply tool's two text input modes

phab:T254366: Add @ mention affordance to visual mode's toolbar

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

1. First impression is "What happened"? When clicking "Reply", the link suddenly dissappears (which is an unexpected behavior for clicking a link) and the tool interface appears too quickly and abruptly. I would expect that a large element like this would have a fade-in animation. It is custormary to show a yellow background color quickly fading to white to represent elements that appear in a page and change their surroundings layout. (P.S: Heck, you do that same animation when you finally post the comment. Why not also when the tool appears?)
2. Second impression is "Where am I"? When clicking a post that has several earlier replies, the interface jumps down and the tool apears in the middle of a completely different conversation, in a new context with no visual indication of its relation to the initial comment we're replying to.
3. The large yellow box saying "You are not logged in" is easy to spot. The copyright notice right below it, not so much. Wikipedia puts a very important emphasis on its unusual copyright notice, and this notice is way too easy to overlook. Moreover, it is left-aligned, and the Reply button is to the right, so the notice is not even near the point of the interface where it is relevant.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

The tool is simple to use and does its job.

1. It's a bit weird that clicking "big" makes the text bigger, but clicking it again makes it smaller, by way of disabling the "big" font. I expected to make it still bigger.
2. I know that the "Visual" and "Code" keywords respectively correspond to WYSIWYG and wiki editors, but I'm not sure that they are a good fit to their purpose in this interface. Descriptions like "Styles" and "plain code" would be more universally understood, I think, and they would better fit the limited expectations of writing a single comment in a thread, as well as the limited tool functions. This is not the full-blown Visual editor of Wikipedia articles.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

I have no clue how to do that. I can't find a "ping" button in any of the menus, and clicking on someones's name navigates to their user page. (At least the message draft is not lost when navigating back. Good thing!)

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Same as above, I can't find how to do that.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Same as above, I can't find how to do that.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Changing between Visual and Code is intuitive, and the noticeable delay is not too bad even for a large post.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Yes, though for a very long comment written in the Code section, the Reply button goes out of sight, pushed far down the page by the Preview panel, which is weird. I'm undecided between liking that it forces you to scroll down through all your message again to review it, or the fact that the button is missing when you want to press it.

I like that, if you press Cancel, it scrolls you up back where you started.

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

I'm surprised that the result is quite normal. :-) Good indentation, simple code. Well done.

I also hadn't seen before the Edit quality tool. Adding comments to the comments? Seems intriguing, and quite meta.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

Good tool, simple to use, it's good for what it's made for.

P.S. Hey, why does this current box where I'm writing have a Replace tool, and the Reply tool hasn't? I hadn't missed it 'till I saw this one ;-)

Thank you for taking the time to test the tool and write up the impressions and feedback you have, @Diego Moya.

Some comments and follow up questions below...

Comments

When clicking "Reply", the link suddenly dissappears (which is an unexpected behavior for clicking a link) and the tool interface appears too quickly and abruptly. I would expect that a large element like this would have a fade-in animation

Here's a ticket for this issue: phab:T255086

Second impression is "Where am I"? When clicking a post that has several earlier replies, the interface jumps down and the tool appears in the middle of a completely different conversation, in a new context with no visual indication of its relation to the initial comment we're replying to.

"Where am I"? That's a great way of describing this issue. I've added the feedback you shared to the ticket where we will be thinking through this issue. Please comment on the ticket if you think anything could be made more clear: phab:T254208#6213234

It's a bit weird that clicking "big" makes the text bigger, but clicking it again makes it smaller, by way of disabling the "big" font. I expected to make it still bigger.

Ah, it sounds like you expect the big icon to function as if there are a range of text sizes, when in reality, it is a binary: big or not big. Here's a ticket for that one: phab:T254420.

I know that the "Visual" and "Code" keywords respectively correspond to WYSIWYG and wiki editors, but I'm not sure that they are a good fit to their purpose in this interface. Descriptions like "Styles" and "plain code" would be more universally understood, I think, and they would better fit the limited expectations of writing a single comment in a thread, as well as the limited tool functions. This is not the full-blown Visual editor of Wikipedia articles.

This is a wonderful point. I've created a ticket for this and added a follow up question for you on the ticket which can be found here: phab:T255085.

I have no clue how to do that. I can't find a "ping" button in any of the menus, and clicking on someones's name navigates to their user page. (At least the message draft is not lost when navigating back. Good thing!)

We hear you on this. We will be adding a visual indication that will, hopefully, make it more clear to people this functionality exists and how to use it. Here is the ticket where the work to implement this will happen: phab:T254366.

Changing between Visual and Code is intuitive, and the noticeable delay is not too bad even for a large post.

This is nice to hear.

for a very long comment written in the Code section, the Reply button goes out of sight, pushed far down the page by the Preview panel,

Good spot. I've added this issue to the description of the task where we will be thinking, holistically, about the behavior of the tool. Here is that ticket: phab:T254208#6213234.

Please comment there if you think the way I've represented the issue you surfaced could be more clear and/or complete.

I'm surprised that the result is quite normal. :-) Good indentation, simple code. Well done.

The team will be encouraged to hear this ^ _ ^

P.S. Hey, why does this current box where I'm writing have a Replace tool, and the Reply tool hasn't? I hadn't missed it 'till I saw this one ;-)

This is the first time I'm thinking about the "Replace" tool in this context...can you share when you would need/expect to use the "Replace" tool in the context of commenting on a talk page?

Follow up questions

The copyright notice right below it, not so much. Wikipedia puts a very important emphasis on its unusual copyright notice, and this notice is way too easy to overlook...

Are you able to share a link or screenshot that shows where you think the copyright notice is presented in a more obvious way?

Ah, it sounds like you expect the big icon to function as if there are a range of text sizes, when in reality, it is a binary: big or not big.

Exactly, and the icons with an "up" arrow and "down" arrow contributed a lot to that expectation. Microsoft Word has almost identical icons that do repeatedly increase or decrease the current size of the selected text.

For options that represent a fixed size, I would expect a list representing the range of all the available font sizes (big, normal, small, exra-big, extra-small), and no switch-on, switch-off effect (selecting the same option twice would simply re-apply the selected size without any effect).

This is the first time I'm thinking about the "Replace" tool in this context...can you share when you would need/expect to use the "Replace" tool in the context of commenting on a talk page?

I hadn't thought it much when I wrote that comment. It's just that whenever I spend time writing a long, elaborate answer, I end up missing a full editor (undo/redo is a usual suspect often missing from mobile interfaces, and Replace has its uses when re-styling wikitext format codes).

Wikipedia comments are particularly prone to that problem: talk pages being an asynchronous bulleting board, and given the level and depth of discourse, its comments often require a composition effort that simpler online chat tools don't need.

Now, a visual tool and dedicated editor with the content of a simple comment (not the whole section) could somewhat reduce the need of a more potent tool. But I too often find myself transferring my comment drafts from Wikipedia's edit box to an external full-featured text editor for composition.

Are you able to share a link or screenshot that shows where you think the copyright notice is presented in a more obvious way?

There aren't many websites that put so much emphasis on the copyright attribution of the written comments. Here I would expect a large icon near the reply button to represent the rights being transferred to the Wikipedia community.

Fortunately, Creative Commons have developed exactly such icons - simply placing the CC BY-SA 3.0 icons close to the Reply button could be enough to draw the user's attention to the copyright note.