Not sure how relevent we could get. Other than say "see http://mozilla.org/support";.Asa Dotzler wrote:
Asa asked me to comment on this thread. Sorry, but I haven't been following npm.layout and am late to this. Overall, I have no problem with the classification scheme. It provides a limited means of grouping errors as well as a hint to the investigator what kinds of symptoms to look for in the site.
The only new suggestion I have is to consider that a person who uses this tool has a problem with our browser and we should try to help them if possible. We should provide links to pages which contain information about common causes of the types of problems and how to resolve them if possible. Think problems caused by cookie settings, popup blocking, ad blocking, dpi settings, etc.
Browser crashes Browser freeze
We could add that to the results window when the user completes. Though not really sure if that would be helpful to anyone.
There gone. They were just space fillers while I was populating the list initially. If we crash or freeze on a page... your not going to be able to invoke the tool. Trackback will pick up the cause of the crash. If it's a popular problem it will be a topcrash. Regardless, it's not really our place.
Do Ma and Pa Kettle really know what a crash or freeze is? Is there a non-techie way to say this? If we keep this, I suggest combining them as Safari does.
If these can't be used to submit information and are only to filter other reports into other categories, I would recommend just dropping them. However, it would useful to provide a page which described what happens during a crash, why installing talkback and submitting reports is good and a suggestion about filing a crash bug in bug if they are up to it.The first time you run the tool, it says that "This tool allows you to tell the Evangelism Team about web sites that do not work properly in Firefox, or shut Firefox out. This is your way to help us ensure the best possible experience for Firefox users. Please take a moment to read the following to learn how we use the information we collect should you choose to participate."
It's shown only the first time they run the tool. So they know all about what it does/how it works.
The categories are pretty essential, since they are the only user defined way of filtering. Other than that, we just rely on OS, Browser, version, etc. etc. Nothing about the problem. Just the environment.
Granted, I don't expect 100% accuracy in the categories (perhaps I'll create a UI for admin's to even modify if they choose). It's the only way we can really do stats on common problems (site's blocking, vs. misrendering, or plugin issues, etc.). It's important just for a statistical sense.
Robert asked if a login problem is not related to our being blocked "is it really our problem?" Yes, since many log in problems have to do with cookie settings and/or cookie bugs. I think "Can't log in" should be a separate category from the other subcategories. How about "Browser not supported" instead of "Blocked"? That is usually the type of message sites give to us.
Ok. Makes sense.
Again, providing information to the user about problems that cookie settings etc may cause might be helpful. If there is a user caused configuration problem, it would be best to at least try to tell them a few steps they can take themselves to resolve the issue rather than just leaving them borked.The problem here is that the tool isn't tech support. Perhaps it would be wise to remind them of: http://www.mozilla.org/support/ when they submit a report as "a way to get help". But I don't think we can really provide them any good info via the tool.
I don't want to be replicating mozilla's suport resources... they are pretty good, and more capable that reporter.
Nor do I want people to view reporter as a tech support option. It's a feedback method. It's talkback for evangelism. Not a troubleshooter.
If anything someone should come up with yet-another-webtool for the support site, that asks users questions, and ultimately redirects them to information to help them.
Blank page Content missing
I agree with the others that these could probably be combined into just "Content Missing" although if Safari makes the distinction we might wish to follow their lead.
That was my belief as well
Behavior wrong Appearance wrong Plugin won't load Other problem
Anyway, I think this is a good idea that has been long in coming and I look forward to seeing the results.
I'm looking forward to it as well
- Robert _______________________________________________ mozilla-layout mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-layout
