Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Users should be clear they are using a prototype #146

Closed
edwardhorsford opened this issue Feb 11, 2016 · 10 comments
Closed

Users should be clear they are using a prototype #146

edwardhorsford opened this issue Feb 11, 2016 · 10 comments
Labels
🕔 Days A few unknowns, but we roughly know what’s involved. Feature Request User requests a new feature

Comments

@edwardhorsford
Copy link
Contributor

There's a couple issues it would be good to address around running the kit:

  • Users should never mistake the kit for being the "real" GOV.UK - especially when a prototype is running on the web.
  • Users should consider carefully before entering personal data in to prototypes. This may be ok in some situations, but the kit looking like GOV.UK might imply it has the same security - which it doesn't.

An idea / suggestion:

screen shot 2016-02-11 at 14 20 17

A lightbox that displays on first load of the prototype, and can be dismissed. The lightbox is hidden using a cookie, so users won't keep seeing it. This ensures that every time a new users comes across a prototype, they see this warning at least once.

Some considerations: are there seperate needs around a warning displayed online, vs one potentially displayed during user research, vs one displayed running locally.

@timpaul
Copy link
Contributor

timpaul commented Feb 13, 2016

Also, we currently publish the kit to Heroku so we can link to the example pages from their associated design patterns. Do we want to trigger this warning for those? If not, we'll need to be able to disable it with an environment variable.

@edwardhorsford
Copy link
Contributor Author

Agreed - this isn't needed on the site we publish examples / documentation on. Perhaps another reason that whatever's published on govuk-prototype-kit.herokuapp.com doesn't have to be exactly the same as what you run if you download the kit.

Talking with Stephen Gill, it sounds like some services might like to display a persistent banner - which might be more suitable for docs, etc?

screen shot 2016-02-15 at 10 26 07

@edwardhorsford
Copy link
Contributor Author

Minimum viable prototype - what do people think?

This just a prototype - we'd want a good accessible version before releasing.

@timpaul
Copy link
Contributor

timpaul commented Feb 16, 2016

Hmm,

I get the popup each time I refresh the page. Should we also consider just
using a dismissible banner - in the same way we do the cookies banner?

On 15 February 2016 at 11:05, Ed Horsford [email protected] wrote:

Minimum viable prototype
http://govuk-prototype-kit-warning.herokuapp.com/ - what do people
think?

This just a prototype - we'd want a good accessible version before
releasing.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#146 (comment)
.

@edwardhorsford
Copy link
Contributor Author

@timpaul the intention would be that it's hidden via cookie. However that makes it hard to demo, so the prototype shows on every page.

IMHO we want to be more prominent than a banner in this case - we want to be very explicit that this is not GOV.UK

@edwardhorsford
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've updated my prototype to use the dialog element with polyfill. It stores a record of the user having seen the message in a cookie.

Try the prototype (open in incognito window to try again)

screen shot 2016-04-04 at 14 53 49

Next steps are to get this in to the accessibility sandbox and get it tested. Chris Moore has already said it works well with the screen reader he tried.

@joelanman
Copy link
Contributor

idea - support a query string to suppress the warning, so you can link from one prototype to another without an extra warning at the point of linking

@joelanman
Copy link
Contributor

Idea for a banner:

image

@joelanman
Copy link
Contributor

from slack:

Alex Torrance [2:50 PM]
maybe over engineering, but could you sandbox prototypes using a standard log in screen (as opposed to basic auth pop up) and put the username and password on the page.

[2:50]
would stop search engines but still be open

[2:50]
or maybe even have some kind of capture style mechanism so you can only proceed with a cookie set

Joe Lanman [2:52 PM]
sounds like it could work

[2:53]
it would be a basic captcha

[2:53]
so, you have to be signed in (session) to see any page (edited)

[2:54]
the sign in page has yadda yadda this is a prototype, and the password is ABC

@timpaul timpaul added the Feature Request User requests a new feature label Sep 6, 2017
@NickColley NickColley removed the ready label Jul 16, 2018
@timpaul timpaul added 🕔 Days A few unknowns, but we roughly know what’s involved. Priority: low labels May 20, 2019
@ruthhammond
Copy link

Closed as password page works well

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🕔 Days A few unknowns, but we roughly know what’s involved. Feature Request User requests a new feature
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants