This task is about conducting a usability test with people who are new to using Wikipedia talk pages to better understand how they perceive/understand the Reply tool's two text input modes: `source` and `visual`.
=== Background
As T255085 explains, the purpose, relationship and behavior of the Reply tool's two modes need to be clearly understood by contributors, across experience levels.
Trouble is, the current naming conventions – `source` and `visual` – contributed to //some// test participants [i][ii] being confused about what the modes do and how they relate (read: //What happens when you "switch" modes?"//)
=== What we are trying to learn
What tab names cause people to most clearly and easily understand the following:
- The currently named `source` mode is for writing a comment using code
- The currently named `visual` mode is for writing a comment using a WYSIWYG-like interface
- The tabs represent modes that can be selected/switched between without losing what you've written.
=== Variants to test
|Variant | Mode 1 | Mode 2
| --- | --- | ---
| A |Visual | Source
| B |Visual | Wikitext
| C | //TBD// | //TBD//
| D | //TBD// | //TBD//
=== Open questions
- [ ] What is the best way to learn what is described in the "What we are trying to learn" section above?
=== Done
- [ ] All "Open questions" are answered
- [ ] We gather the evidence needed to decide which approach helps newer contributors clearly and easily understand the following:
-- The currently named `source` mode is for writing a comment using code
-- The currently named `visual` mode is for writing a comment using a WYSIWYG-like interface
-- The tabs represent modes that can be selected/switched between without losing what you've written.
---
i. T246190
ii. T246191