A test of the MVP1 Onboarding flows. This test report covers:
...
Green - seems fine (I believe Figma is out of date)
Red - looks like a bug
Amber - for review by Designer
”Welcome to PathCheck”
Different background on language button
Text and circle are much lower in screen than design
Terms of Use checkbox is on a separate screen.
“Terms of Use” screen
Does not exist in Figma design
“Notifications” screen
Does not exist on Android (iOS only)
“Allow Location Access” screen
Heading font size is much larger & bolder
Text only just fits on screen - likely an issue for smaller devices
“Allow Location Access” pop-up
App name does not match (both are wrong! - should be PathCheck or PathCheck GPS) - SAF-681 existing bug
Pop-up text does not match (this is just a standard difference between Android & iOS)
“Auto Start disabled” pop-up
Missing from Figma.
But should only occur on certain phones (e.g. Redmi), should not appear on Moto G7 phone - SAF-718 raised
Follow-ups from above
For review with Design team (my personal view is that the ones that matter are the ones in bold below).
Different background on language button
Text and circle are much lower in screen than design
Heading font size is much larger & bolder
Text only just fits on screen - likely an issue for smaller devices
“Continue” button is much lower on the screen than other buttons in onboarding.
Bugs to be fixed:
SAF-681 (existing)
SAF-718 (new)
...
Considering the process from a user perspective, rather than simply comparing to the design, concerns as follows (for discussion with Design).
Most significant: is it correct to present the full Terms to the user during onboarding, and asking them to confirm they have read them? As a point of Comparison the Italian COVID app (Immuni) requires that you confirm you have read a very short Privacy statement (6 or so short key points). Presenting a full, verbose set of terms, and asking the user to declare they have read them seems deeply misaligned with our approach on consent, where we try to lay out as clearly & simply as possible what the user is consenting to. Can we simplify this so that users actually have a chance of reading & understanding what they are signing up to?
...
(I know we have been through this with Legal once before. But with direct experience now of other COVID apps not presenting verbose Terms to users, perhaps we can revisit? Is this
...
something we have looked at in our user testing?)
On Terms of Use screen “Continue” button is much lower on the screen than other buttons in onboarding. While there is no Figma design, this seems inconsistent, hence probably should be fixed to be consistent with other buttons.
Pop-up text for “Disable Auto Start” is inaccurate: "PathCheck needs to be able to auto start to privately save the places you visit". This is simply not true. What may be true, on some devices, is that it needs to auto start to reliably save the places you visit (else data will be lost after a restart). (I did mention this in passing in SAF-718, but it’s not the key thrust of that bug report, so I should raise separately to get this addressed).
App name. Figma designs show the App name in the Splash screens as “PathCheck”, which is inconsistent with the Application name that appears by the App icon, in notifications etc. which is going to be “PathCheck GPS” (even if SAF-681 means it is currently “PathCheck BT”). Is this inconsistency intentional, or should we consider using “PathCheck GPS” in these onboarding screens?
Nothing in the App name, or onboarding process, explicitly refers to COVID-19. This seems like a significant omission. While the context may be obvious to us now, it may be less obvious to people who download the app, at some point in the future. The screens do refer to “the virus”, but I don’t think we should assume that this is completely clear to all users that this refers to COVID-19 - there are other viruses in the world! I wonder whether it was a deliberate decision to not mention COVID-19 at all, or something that has happened by accident? I think we should mention COVID at least once to make the purpose of the app clear.
Next steps
Get review comments from Design Team, update article, and raise further bugs as required.
...
5 points in Amber in “Follow-ups from above”. Do they agree the 3 bold items are bugs, and the other 2 are not?
3 5 points in “other points for discussion”. Do they agree that Which of these should also be raised as bugs to make drive further product changes?
Do design want to make any updates to Figma in light of the above? In particular see green points above, which I believe are not product bugs (which implies Figma is incorrect).