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

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#220 2 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 9 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
新手友好度
25/100
Issue 类型
功能
描述清晰度
基本清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
html, playwright
领域
design, frontend

调研方向

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.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

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

主要语言
HTML
星标
3
派生
0
平均合并
8 天 15 小时
30 天内合并 PR
1

环境准备

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 没有 Pull Request 模板
  • 阅读贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

PolicyEngine/macro 的其他 Issue

查看 PolicyEngine/macro 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Design Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。