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

User-Test ytt Schema Validation #707

Closed
28 tasks done
Tracked by #561
pivotaljohn opened this issue Jul 21, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed
28 tasks done
Tracked by #561

User-Test ytt Schema Validation #707

pivotaljohn opened this issue Jul 21, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@pivotaljohn
Copy link
Contributor

pivotaljohn commented Jul 21, 2022

With the core validation rules implemented, let's get usability and suitability feedback from users.

The goal is to vet our assumptions so that we can either confidently adjust or move forward with our implementation towards General Availability of this feature.


📝 ytt Validations Usability Testing Plan (Google Doc)

Plan:

  • Identify use-cases and create interview materials for each:
    • Conduct exploratory testing to surface questionable UX use cases.
      • Explore: create different combinations of inputs, run them and scrutinize the output
      • Capture questionable UX'es in the Testing Plan doc; frame it as a "claim" to make about a proposed change in the UX
    • Prioritize and scope the claims that we'll test
    • For each "claim" that is in-scope, produce an example and instructions that would place the user in that scenario.
    • Test-drive the example to ensure:
      • it works (and that all the needed resources/information are provided);
      • it will create the desired situation; and
      • that there are as few anchor biases as possible in the materials.
  • Identify Candidates
    • Identify people whom we might interview
    • Determine who is willing to be interviewed

Interview:

  • Interview 1 — Vijay
    • schedule
    • conduct
  • Interview 2 — Clemens
    • schedule
    • conduct
  • Interview 3 — Robert
    • schedule
    • conduct
  • Interview 4 — Jay
    • schedule
    • conduct
  • Interview 5 — Scott
    • schedule
    • conduct
  • Interview 6 — Pradnya (CNR)
    • schedule
    • conduct

Results:

  • Synthesize results of interviews
  • Author User Stories describing improvements
@pivotaljohn pivotaljohn mentioned this issue Jul 21, 2022
19 tasks
@aaronshurley aaronshurley moved this to To Triage in Carvel Jul 26, 2022
@aaronshurley aaronshurley moved this from To Triage to In Progress in Carvel Jul 28, 2022
@pivotaljohn pivotaljohn moved this from In Progress to Done in Carvel Aug 29, 2022
@pivotaljohn
Copy link
Contributor Author

While there's some ongoing previews/interviews; we've completed the scope of interviews required to validate/confirm the requisite API claims. 👍🏻

Repository owner moved this from Done to Closed in Carvel Aug 29, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added the carvel triage This issue has not yet been triaged for relevance label Aug 29, 2022
@pivotaljohn pivotaljohn removed the carvel triage This issue has not yet been triaged for relevance label Sep 1, 2022
pivotaljohn pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 12, 2022
... to improve readability.

Usability testing (#707) made clear that violation messages on a single
line are quite difficult to visually parse, making such error messages
less readable.

To support the reformatting, context is gathered at the time a violation
is detected. The message is formatted once all violations have
been collected.

Also includes minor improvements to "named" rule messages to improve
readability.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants