Dashboard usability test: six proposals, four implemented in drafts, two need a call

Abierto
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#220 2 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 9 días

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
5/5
Tiempo estimado
Más de una semana
Aptitud para principiantes
25/100
Tipo de issue
Nueva funcionalidad
Claridad
Bastante claro
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
html, playwright
Área
design, frontend

Línea de trabajo

Read the r5 UX-test notes for the persona table, paths, and click counts, then inspect the referenced entry points: obr/index.html, models/index.html, forecasts/make_open_fans.py, models/compare/build.py, and site_nav.py. The issue asks for decisions across seven proposals, including sign-off on a summary claim and a choice about how to show forecast values. Done means those decisions are resolved and the selected usability changes are implemented; the issue gives no specific test command.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

question

A task-based usability test ran on a local merge of #204, #205, #206, #219 and r5-api-scenarios. Seven tasks covered four personas: policy analyst, rates trader, journalist and developer. Playwright started every task at / and counted clicks at 1440 and 375 px. All seven tasks can be completed, and no page scrolls horizontally at 375. The small fixes are already pushed to the owning PRs:

  • #204 0d9711a: Combine step 1 gets a visible "See the scored 1p example →" link. The validation tab heading changes from "How each model is validated" to "How each model is checked".
  • #206 234fdd9: the /pe macro-feedback links now go to /obr#answers.
  • #205 1973dd2: the Forecasts expander links to the Growth and Inflation tables. The topic tables now say their bands are raw while the track-record fans are re-calibrated. No number changed.

The proposals below need a judgement call or a bigger change, so I have not made them.

  1. Say whether the macro feedback changes the cost. An analyst asked "does the macro feedback change it?" The site answers in GDP (about 0.34× the revenue by q12, /obr#answers). It never says plainly that the costing itself is not revised: borrowing is not returned by the adapter, and that appears only in the "Cannot answer" row. Proposal: one sentence at the /obr worked example. (obr/index.html, #206)
  2. Show each model's verdict on its router card. On /models with "Cost a reform" and "UK" selected, the OBR card's only quality signal is the tag "published anchor". The verdict sits inside the collapsed "What it is, strengths and limits". Proposal: show the one-line verdict on the card itself. It is already on the model's own "at a glance" panel, so link to that or reuse it, without adding a second copy of the fact. (models/index.html, #204)
  3. Add a yes/no lead on /models/validation. A journalist asking "is any model validated?" finds four classes and seven verdicts, but no line that answers the question. The verdict column supports one: no model is validated as a forecaster, and the strongest evidence is replication of a published anchor. This needs your sign-off because it is a summary claim. (#204)
  4. Put the CPI and GDP numbers next to the fans on /forecasts. A rates reader needs 3 clicks and 2 expanders to read the next four quarters (Forecasts, then the Inflation tab, then "Quarter by quarter"). The fans have no values and no hover. Decision: table the re-calibrated bands next to the fan, or keep only the raw table on the topic tab (it is now labelled). (forecasts/make_open_fans.py, #205)
  5. Show the answer first on Same question. For +100bp, the benchmark box comes first and the answer table starts below the fold at 1440. Proposal: put the table first and the benchmark directly under it, or collapse the benchmark to one line. (models/compare/build.py, #219)
  6. Fix the Forecasts sub-tab row at desktop width. economy-subnav-row is 1599 px wide in a 1440 viewport, so "Tax and benefit reform" is cut under the fade. Options: shorter labels ("Tax and benefits"), or the UK/US switch on its own row. (site_nav.py, #204)
  7. Developer example. The /connect prompt "a 25 basis point US rate cut … hank_shock" sits next to --size -0.0025, which is a 100bp-annualised move. This is already tracked in #211, so fix it on /connect when #211 lands.

Evidence: the persona table, paths and click counts are in the r5 ux-test notes. The screenshots are local. An MCP check, frbus_shock(rffintay_aerr, 1.0, horizon=12), returned GDP −0.551% at 2027Q4, the same as /models/compare.

Recommendation: do 1, 2 and 5 now; they are wording and order changes within one PR each. Items 3 and 4 need your call.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Lenguaje dominante
HTML
Estrellas
3
Forks
0
Merge medio
8 d 15 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
1

Preparar el entorno

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de PolicyEngine/macro

Todos los issues de PolicyEngine/macro

Issues similares

Más issues de Design

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.