VisualEditor/Portal/Why/User Test Data/fo
| VisualEditor portal |
|---|
 |
| General |
| Um |
| Hjálp til við íverksetanini |
Sum ein partur av okkara fyrireikingum til at koyra VisualEditor, koyrdu vit eina royndarkoyring við brúkarum frá UserTesting.com gjøgnum eina røð av uppgávum, har tey fyrst skuldu brúka VisualEditor og síðan tann gamla mátan við Wikimarkup. Summi av teimum høvdu roynt at skriva/rætta á Wikipediu fyrr; fleiri vóru nýbyrjarar. skript fyri royndirnar er tøkt (á enskum).
Nýta keldurættaran
"Hetta sær av sær sjálvum forvirrandi og út og mest sum ov mikið."
"Tað vóru í tonsatali av útlendskum máliskum í innihaldinum, og tað sá als ikki út sum tann veruliga síðan sá út."
"Eg havi ikki hug til at læra eitt nýtt mál bara fyri at skriva í Wikipediu."
When presented with the source editor, users tended to have the same set of problems. Many of these centred around identifying what they were expected to change; with so much markup, they found it difficult to identify things in the markup view that matched what they'd seen when reading the rendered page. Users were also worried by the clutter of the editing interface, particularly the mass of buttons at the bottom of the "save page" window.
Users struggled to understand the wikimarkup found in a moderately-sized article; when they managed to identify bits, it was almost entirely from comparing their memory of the rendered page to individual words, and looking at the formatting around those words (for example, noting that all of the headers had equals signs, and thus determining that equals signs made headers work). With one exception, every user found the source editor intimidating and would opt not to use it.
Nýta VisualEditor
"Eg eri fyrr hildin uppat, tí tað virkaði ov ørkymlandi. Við [VisualEditor] virkaði tað sum um, at ein og hvør kann finna útav tí."
"[VisualEditor] følist meira sum at skriva í einum word skjali og er ikki so avskrekkjandi, sum [keldurættarin] sum kennist meira sum at skriva í kotum."
Several problems were raised with VisualEditor. Many users found adding links to be confusing, something we have noted and are evaluating, and (as known) VisualEditor was slow to load for some testers.
Several other (now fixed) bugs, such as problems with saving the page, also frustrated users. However, all-but-one of the testers concluded that they preferred using VisualEditor to using the source editor, one of them noting that "[with VisualEditor] I would be more likely to make edits. That interface was a lot easier to understand and I had more confidence that the changes I was making were the changes that I wanted to make. I also like that I had an opportunity to review the changes and note them."