Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve funnels graph type selector #5235

Closed
paolodamico opened this issue Jul 20, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #5384
Closed

Improve funnels graph type selector #5235

paolodamico opened this issue Jul 20, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #5384
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature/funnels Feature Tag: Funnels

Comments

@paolodamico
Copy link
Contributor

I'm pretty unconvinced with the current graph type selector component. It feels too cramped, hard to communicate what each option is easily, and doesn't play nice in some screen dimensions. Here's a proposal to improve it. Thoughts @clarkus ?

Current

Proposal

@paolodamico paolodamico added enhancement New feature or request feature/funnels Feature Tag: Funnels UI/UX labels Jul 20, 2021
@clarkus
Copy link
Contributor

clarkus commented Jul 21, 2021

I think your changes make sense, but the placement is what's throwing me off. I've been seeing the query builder as "this is the structure of my data that I want to analyze". I'm building a set based on events, filters, etc. Once I have that query built, I'm just moving between visualization types. We can't cover every type of insight analysis in one visualization so we break it into multiple visualizations. It feels like that component belongs in the visualization area adjacent to the layout control because it changes how you're consuming the data, not the structure of the data itself.

Secondary to that, we might be able to drop the descriptions from the selected state. They help a user understand what the visualization does, but I'm not sure they always need to be shown. Dropping the description would also let that control better summarize the selected state in a more constrained area. Thoughts?

@paolodamico
Copy link
Contributor Author

Aligned with dropping the descriptions (or at least testing both options). Not sure about visualization though, you're changing much more than what you're visualizing, you're actually getting more / different data by switching. How about A/B testing this after the initial experiment is run?

@clarkus
Copy link
Contributor

clarkus commented Jul 21, 2021

Aligned with dropping the descriptions (or at least testing both options).

To be clear, I do think the descriptions add value when the dropdown is open and the user is choosing an option. Just not sure we have to show them in the selected state.

Not sure about visualization though, you're changing much more than what you're visualizing, you're actually getting more / different data by switching. How about A/B testing this after the initial experiment is run?

Do you see this as a different discussion from #4654? The visualization type here is more than just layout or orientation, it's a different structuring of the query results. I see insights as categories of analysis and within that there could be one or more visualizations options that represent various aspects of that analysis. I totally see your point, but thinking about it from a systems level and the way visualization options are handled in other insights, it feels more appropriate if we place it in that visualization area.

I think testing it is a great idea. 💯

@paolodamico
Copy link
Contributor Author

Definitely what I was thinking around descriptions. As per our discussion in our last standup we’ll start out keeping the selector in the current placement and once the funnels experiment is over we can test moving it around. Will work on this today.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature/funnels Feature Tag: Funnels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants