The purpose of the redesign of the all.html page is to
- Improve the Bounce rate
- Improve download rate
- Improve the UI of the page
To do so, we have created three designs:
The goal of testing is to determine which of the three designs has the overall best download rate with the lowest bounce rate.
We will be running a week-long, concurrent test where we test four designs
- all.html (current page)
Any user who tries to go to the current all.html page has a 25% chance of seeing one of the four pages. The test will be to see which page performs the best.
These designs have already been implemented and here are the suggestions for changes:
- "Other Versions: Firefox 126.96.36.199"
- Indian languages are not associated to India but to the Kazhakstan area
- Some maps don't look totally geographically correct, India is too small for
example, France and Italy look a bit merged, it looks like the Caspian and Black sea were merged too, Saudi Arabia is too thin...
- Norwegian shouldn't be listed in North America
- listing Danish in North America (for Greenland I guess) and Spanish in Africa
(for the cities of Ceuta and Melilla?) is a bit stretched in my opinion
- it is strange to me that Mexico isn't included in North America but Greenland
- I'm not an expert in localization issues, but I'm concerned about the use of a map to identify languages. I was under the impression that using maps (which we are not doing here, I realize) or maps to identify languages was best avoided as the link between country/region-and-language is not always clear or reliable.
Using my part of the world as an example: Most people here speak English, though Canada has an odd mix of US English, and British English. A significant minority speak French. If a French visitor visits, clicks on the Americas part of the map, would they see French offered? Should they have clicked on Europe, and then France? Or perhaps more importantly, would the visitor think they need to? Would they wonder which they should choose? I'm sure that these issues have been discussed already, but I get the impression these discussions where held internally. Please do correct me if I'm off-base on this. Could you share a bit of the thought process that led to keeping the maps concept?
- If you do not mind, I will be a bit polemical :) I understand we are adding English, as Esperanto, as lingua franca in all World regions. However, I do not know if both English varieties should be added everywhere. For instance, in Europe, as far as I know, British variety is the one used by European Union institutions, and by Mozilla Europe site as well. Conversely, but logically, we are not adding American varieties of Spanish and Portuguese in Europe.
- Whoa, this is surely gonna cause some political problems. I can easily imagine people getting angry because of the way you group the languages (e.g.: what does Turkish and Polish have in common? Why is Slovenian in the Western group, while Czech is in the Eastearn one, even though the Czech Republic is geographically more to the West than Slovenia? etc.) Also, I can't help the fact that this map somehow reminds me of the one on the left here: And if I see it this way, try to imagine what the right wing people would feel like... Also, having a separate section for Central America without a single Central American localization might seem offensive to some people from that region - most of these are locales coming from their former colonial overlords...
- https://www-trunk.stage.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-1.html?c=north-america Norwegian locales are listed for North America, I think this is wrong. Also, IMO it is a bit strange to separate Mexico as if it were not in North America and list again all the locales next to it.
- Steven:This is much better.I think we are still leaving Maldives out which is a bunch of islands in the Indian ocean. I am no Geography expert but it looks like we are adding Iran in Central Asia in the new screenshot. Here is a link to the map maintained by US gov. http://www.state.gov/p/sca/ci/
- Some languages' names are capitalized, others are not. I know that at least for Polish the spelling rule is that "polski" being an adjective should be written with lower "p". However, in this context, I think that it should be capitalized, because it's an independent element of the UI. Besides, this is used inconsistently, e.g. French is capitalized, and it has the same rule regarding adjectives as Polish.
- Galician seems to be in the wrong section, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Spain). It should be in the hispania region. I would have probably taken a map where the region if Island doesn't correspond to it's national debt.
- Too much mouse clicks in order to get the download begin. *It is not trivial to locate the operating system switch button. People may download files for the wrong OS in case the script in unable to guess their OS correctly. *Geographic knowledge is required in order to download. It may sound strange, but not everyone know on which continent he is, including young childs.
- I thought the search box in the top was a select/drop down box, so I started by clicking the arrow with no good result. I think the page looks much more complex than the old one. It is still very long requiring lots of scrolling, and instead of looking in an alphabetically ordered list of language names, I now first have to look at some maps in some random order, and then I have to look at a list of language names. It is not obvious to me that each individual map highlights a section of the European map. It took me 10 or 20 seconds to figure out, even through I have seen a mockup of this page some time long ago. The native name of the language is the most prominent, yet they are sorted by their English name, and it is not obvious if they are sorted rows first or columns first. I think it is great that there are only download buttons for one platform at a time and that the user's platform is detected. (As long as it is still possible to change the platform) An earlier comment discussed if both British and US English should be in all categories. If only one should stay, I think it should be US English, as many people where I live prefer to use software in it's "original language", which for Firefox is US English.
- I have three concerns about the map, the first is accessility. No idea how to make a good accessible page here.
The next concern is echoing what KaiRo said about Esperanto, though that's an edgecase which can just be fixed somehow. The biggest point is actually my third one. Lack of education. Have you seen those reports on TV where people on the street are asked to point at the continent they're on? Depressing, but true. I don't think that the map proposed comes with any of the common problems of flags or countries, as it was way more corse than that. I'd try to keep France and Spain in the same region, as there are a variety of languages fighting over that border, but that's an implementation detail. The most common complaint was that the languages should appear more than once, and that's totally possible. Like, adding Turkish and Arabic to the languages offered in Europe makes total sense to me. Maybe some form of autocomplete search bar? To get the UI bootstrapped with user data, we'll run into a performance problem. But maybe we can just create a small js data piece from geo-location and accept-lang. The latter is likely going to be less important, as many people don't configure accept-lang to actually work for them. I guess.
- Too much mouse clicks in order to get the download begin.
- It is not trivial to locate the operating system switch button. People may
download files for the wrong OS in case the script in unable to guess their OS correctly.
- Geographic knowledge is required in order to download. It may sound strange,
but not everyone know on which continent he is, including young childs.
- I guess the continent headers are there to make it easier to scan a shorter
list of languages, but the lists are still nearly as long as they were before, so I don't see any value added by these headers. The headers also requires more clicking and more thinking (which one should I click?). I don't like them.
- The lists are long. I am wondering if there is a way we can change the display
to have the "primary" languages of a region listed, and then a side section within the existing list that says, "Other languages spoken in this region". We might be able to display "primary" languages bigger and "secondary" languages smaller.The challenge here is how we define "primary". And what is the best way to display the information within the existing designs. Not an expert, so I don't know.
- I think it would be great if languages will be moved to top of the list in case they are acceptable by the user (navigator.language/HTTP_ACCEPT_LANGUAGE). If
this is implemented, users may not have to scroll all over the list just to locate specific language.
- I think it would be nice with some OS detection like on all-1.html and
all-2.html, so that only the relevant OS is showed on first view. I also think it would be nicer with less scrolling and highlighting of the HTTP Accept-Language like I suggested before: http://temp.jesperkristensen.dk/mozilla/firefox-download-language.html