Page MenuHomePhabricator

Explore JADE as a feedback tool for improvements to technical documentation
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

JADE allows users to annotate wikipages and edits, which makes it a potentially useful tool for collecting user feedback for the purpose of improving technical documentation on wikis.

Can JADE be used for this purpose? Is this type of application too far off from JADE's intended purpose?

Event Timeline

srodlund created this task.Dec 12 2018, 7:45 PM
Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptDec 12 2018, 7:45 PM
srodlund removed a subscriber: Amire80.Dec 12 2018, 7:46 PM
srodlund added a subscriber: Ladsgroup.

This is a great proposal. We should figure out what data we want to get from the feedback, and how that will be used. Can you think of any yes/no or multiple-choice questions which would make a good prompt? I imagine we'll want something more provocative than "was this page helpful", although even something that simple would probably give us a signal for identifying the pain points and to pull out positive examples.

Harej added a comment.Dec 17 2018, 6:17 PM

I remember at the technical engagement offsite we discussed this very idea. I don't think we had anything more complicated in mind than "did you find this to be useful, yes/no" which is apparently good enough for most tech documentation websites.

I don't consider this to be a terribly high priority for Jade, but I don't think it would take a lot of work either. If we want to take the easy way out we just need two fields ("did you find this useful" and an optional text field for when people say no so they can explain their opinion further) which would be a trivial schema to write and then we would need some kind of front-end interface like a gadget. The schema work could be done in an afternoon and a gadget could probably be written in a few days. So if we decide to pursue this, this would be a quick way to proceed.

Let's consider whether Jade is the right tool, or if QuickSurveys might be good enough. The yardstick we're using for Jade is, "will users be collaborating to write judgments?", and I don't see that collaboration makes much sense here. The documentation could be useful to one person and not another, and there's no meaning in having a consensus-building discussion.

QuickSurveys might need a bit of tweaking to configure it to display on non-main namespaces, and to include the page title in responses. Just a thought…

awight removed a subscriber: awight.Mar 21 2019, 4:05 PM