On 23/07/13 11:35, James Forrester wrote:
It would imply that this is a preference that Wikimedia will support. This would be a lie. We have always intended for VisualEditor to be a wiki-level preference, and for this user-level preference to disappear once the need for an opt-in (i.e., the beta roll-out to production wikis) is over.
The feedback from established users [1] and the results from Aaron Halfaker's study [2] suggest that opt-in would be the most appropriate policy given VE's current level of maturity. That is, disable it by default and re-enable the preference.
A proponent of source editing would claim that the steep learning curve is justified by the end results. A visual editor is easier for new users, but perhaps less convenient for power users. So Aaron Halfaker's study took its measurements at the point in the learning curve where you would expect the benefit of VE to be most clear: the first edit. Despite the question being as favourable to VE as possible, the result strongly favoured the use of source editing:
"Newcomers with the VisualEditor were ~43% less likely to save a single edit than editors with the wikitext editor (x^2=279.4, p<0.001), meaning that Visual Editor presented nearly a 2:1 increase in editing difficulty."
On the Wikipedia RFC question "Wikimedia should disable this software by default?", there were 30 support votes and 17 opposed. But many of those 17 oppose votes assumed that VE is beneficial to new users. Now that we know that that isn't the case, the amount of support for enabling VE by default would surely be very small indeed. If it's not beneficial for either established or new users, why have it?
It's not like the VE team are sitting around with no testing to do, no features to add, and no bugs to work on. So the argument that you need people looking at VE in order to provide feedback seems shallow.
Round-trip bugs, and bugs which cause a given wikitext input to give different HTML in Parsoid compared to MW, should have been detected during automated testing, prior to beta deployment. I don't know why we need users to report them.
Perhaps the main problem is performance. Perhaps new users are especially likely to quit on the first edit because they don't want to wait 25-30 seconds for the interface to load (the time reported in [3]). Performance is a very common complaint for established users also.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VisualEditor/RFC
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:VisualEditor%27s_effect_on_newly_registered_editors/Results
[3] https://office.wikimedia.org/wiki/VisualEditor_user_tests
-- Tim Starling