Drupal Usability Meeting 2023-10-20

Added ✨ Use modal in add new field flow Active to the list of tasks for next week as @benjifisher suggested.

and alongside the "use modals in field creation flow" it might be a good idea to also discuss the changes in the context of display modes if there is some time left. there are also a few points to take a look at.

benjifisher → credited AaronMcHale → .

benjifisher → credited anmolgoyal74 → .

benjifisher → credited lauriii → .

benjifisher → credited shaal → .

benjifisher → credited simohell → .

benjifisher → credited worldlinemine → .

As usual, I attached a "rough transcript" of the audio: Zoom provides a text file with the auto-generated captions, and I edit out the initial part, so that the version I post starts with "Welcome, this is the Drupal Usability Meeting for ...".

Today, at @shaal's suggestion, I enabled Zoom's "AI assistant". It produces the following summary, which I have not edited:

Meeting Summary for Drupal Usability Meeting
Hi Benji Fisher,
Here's your meeting summary for Drupal Usability Meeting on 10/20/2023. This summary has been auto-generated. AI-generated content may be inaccurate or misleading. Always check for accuracy.
Summary
Drupal Usability Meeting and Modals Discussion
Benji moderated the Drupal usability meeting in October 2020, with several people in attendance. Aaron suggested starting with the modals in field creation flow issue. Benji also mentioned that he would edit the recording to remove the first ten minutes. Furthermore, he shared a link to a local Drupal site where attendees could log in as admin and find a merge request related to an issue. Aaron then proceeded to summarize the conversation.
Design, Testing, and Feedback: Improving Field Instances and Storage
Aaron and Lauri discussed concerns and strategies related to field instances and field storage in a form. They agreed on the need to improve the user testing process and make more informed design decisions. Aaron suggested that the group should be involved in the process as early as possible, particularly in the design phase. They also discussed the importance of making more information about previous research and testing visible to the group. Lauri emphasized the need to address feedback from the group during the implementation process.
Usability vs. Progress: A Project Challenge
Benji and Lauri discussed the importance of usability and accessibility in their project, with Lauri suggesting that solutions should be usable but not all issues need to be solved in a single step. Thomas expressed concerns about reversing progress made in usability and urged caution about removing the core gate. Benji clarified that the final decision on whether an issue meets the usability gate rests with the court, and Lauri proposed drafting a process proposal for the upcoming weeks. Ofer wondered about the concerns and expressed satisfaction with the group's pace of discussion.
Design and Usability Issues: Documentation and Prototype Suggestions
Lauri discussed usability issues encountered during design work, including a label field displayed before field types which was often overlooked. Despite acknowledging these issues, they were deemed not significant enough to delay progress. Thomas suggested that any changes to the group's operation should be documented for transparency. Benji emphasized the importance of documentation and providing descriptions of code changes. Aaron suggested involving the group more in the design stages, such as presenting prototypes and summarizing user research, and exploring the idea of beta features for rapid iteration. Lauri expressed concerns about the challenges of getting people to enable experimental modules and the need for Pmci to on board with some changes.
Investment Decision and Documentation Progress
Lauri expressed less interest in investing in certain changes due to the associated costs. Benji emphasized the need to focus on next steps, with Lauri agreeing to draft some documentation. Aaron mentioned he would file follow-up issues and encouraged everyone's input. Lauri concluded by saying she would update the team on her progress in a week or two. Additionally, Benji discussed the plan to improve the field creation experience and highlighted the need for feedback on active development projects.
Modal Field Adjustments and Confusions
Benji detailed the adjustments in a new field, mentioning that it now appears in a modal instead of on the page. He identified certain field types, such as Boo, link, and email, and pointed out that the majority of the fields are groups. Benji highlighted a confusion arising from the label field being marked as required, although he clarified that the machine name field is the one that is actually required. Simo and Ralf brought up concerns related to these changes, with Simo highlighting an error that occurs when the machine name field is deleted and Ralf noting that it is strange to have a single label field standing alone. The team agreed that these issues need documentation and eventual resolution.
Label Field and Navigation Discussion
Ralf expressed uncertainty about the technical feasibility of leaving the label field on to the next step in the process. Benji emphasized the need for a generic solution for the steps in the modal process, stating it wouldn't work well for all cases. Thomas suggested two potential solutions to an issue regarding the label field, including automatically adding a red star to indicate an error and providing a sample label to fill the space. Ralf also highlighted a confusing detail in the process where pressing the 'change field type' button caused the user to revert to the first step. Benji agreed, suggesting the addition of a 'previous step' button instead. Lastly, Ralf emphasized the need for more context in the process title to help users navigate the steps better.
UI Navigation Inconsistencies Discussed
Benji, Simo, and Ralf discussed a user interface for selecting options. They noted inconsistencies in navigation, particularly with radio buttons. Benji suggested updating the issue summary to document outstanding tasks. Ralf did not have any further comments. The team decided to continue work on the selection feature.
Consistency and Accessibility in Mobile Navigation
Benji emphasized the need for consistency in error messages, field labels, and button usage across various mobile screens to ensure proper navigation and keyboard usage. Ralf pointed out the importance of aligning the back button with the Terminology used in the process. Benji suggested that the descriptions of field groups and field types need to be announced for screen readers. Simo, Thomas, and Ralf agreed with these suggestions. Benji also mentioned the need for ensuring the automated tests pass and that the consensus was that the modal flow idea was better than the previous version, albeit still in development. The team agreed that they hoped to get the issue resolved for Drupal 10.2 to avoid a drastic change in the admin experience in the future.
Next Steps
• Lauri will consider involving the group in the design process earlier.
• Lauri will draft a proposal for a usability review template and share it with the group for feedback.
• The group will discuss and consider ways to improve transparency in the development process, including documenting decisions and involving the group at different stages.
• Benji and Aaron will work on a system for developers to opt into beta features.
• Ralf to document and fix the error messages related to the label field.
• Consider implementing Thomas' suggestion of automatically adding a red star or showing a partial machine name to improve error messages.
• Ralf to consider making changes to the navigation flow to improve user experience.
• Implement keyboard navigation and screen reader accessibility for field groups, field types, and their options.
• Update the remaining tasks list in the issue summary with specific details and numbers.
• Ensure that the back button aligns with the rest of the UI.

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.