Skip to content

48 manually test the application in browsers #72

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 16, 2026
+20 −7
Merged

48 manually test the application in browsers #72

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
bb86ace
docs: add usability evaluation
edving Sep 16, 2026
feb82af
docs: Update ai-usage.md
edving Sep 16, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 1 addition & 7 deletions docs/ai-usage.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,8 +5,7 @@
We used **ChatGPT, Claude, and Microsoft Copilot** as supplementary tools to
speed up our workflow and help solve smaller problems. They assisted with
translating documentation and README text into English, refining wording, and
providing code examples. **OpenAI Codex** also helped edit this section and run
project checks.
providing code examples.

For documentation, we used AI to turn Norwegian text into English and suggest
clearer wording while keeping the intended meaning. For programming, code examples
Expand All @@ -20,11 +19,6 @@ and design decisions. We critically reviewed suggestions to understand how they
worked and adapted them where necessary to fit the project. AI was never used
to generate entire modules or features without human review.

During this documentation update, `npm run lint` and
`npm run build` both passed, checking ESLint rules, TypeScript types, and the
production build. These checks supplement human review; they do not verify all
application behaviour.

## Experiences

AI was useful for reducing time spent on translation and wording, and for getting
Expand Down
19 changes: 19 additions & 0 deletions docs/usability-evaluation.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
# Usability evaluation

## Overall experience

Based on the group's evaluation, all functionality worked as expected. We found
the application clear and usable, and overall we think the layout suits its purpose
well.

## Mobile layout

The main area for improvement is the placement of buttons on mobile phones.
Users currently need to scroll to reach the navigation buttons when moving to the
next country. A more compact mobile layout could keep more essential controls
and information within view and reduce the need to scroll between actions.

For example, placing country navigation closer to the country selector or reducing
spacing on small screens could make browsing more convenient. These are possible
future improvements; despite this limitation, the group considers the current
mobile layout a good fit overall.