Heuristic Evaluation of Team

1
Heuristic Evaluation of Team3

• By Aarthy Subramanian

2
Focus of the Prototype

• Grouping of Objects
• Object Labels
• Automatic Reference Syntax
• Reference Search

3
Heuristics

• Visibility of System Status- Yes
• - User is well informed about the ongoing
  actions
• Match between System the real world- Yes
• - the grouping and ungrouping features and icons
  used for them are familiar
• User Control and Freedom- No
• - fix deletions by mistake and wrong
• references can be made reversible
• (Undo option)

4
Heuristics (cont.)

• Consistency and Standards- Yes
• - Icons and labeling are standard
• Error Prevention- Yes
• - Simple design features
• Recognition rather than recall- Yes
• - Information is easily retrievable
• e.g. Search Feature
• Flexibility and Efficiency of Use- No
• - fix the labeling feature can be more flexible

5
Heuristics (cont.)

• Aesthetic and Minimalistic Design- Yes
• - new features don't complicate the design
• Help Users recognize, diagnose and recover from
  errors No
• fix can provide an undo option
• Help and Documentation- Yes
• - help provided for naming conventions of
  references

6
Usability Problems

• No way to recover if we delete a wrong portion of
  drawing(H3)
• User doesnt have the option of assigning
  labels(H7)
• How to label the center of a figure?(H7)
• No way to delete a wrong reference(H3)

7
Summary

• Pros
• Grouping and Ungrouping features are clear and
  easy to learn
• Referencing small portions of whiteboard is
  useful for problem solving
• Help Documentation for references
• Reference look up and search

8
Summary (cont.)

• Cons
• Labeling feature lacks flexibility
• No error recovery in case of wrong deletions and
  references