@g I just took a look at the statistics of “Select View Appearance (Theme)” - you are absolutely right: this icon was chosen as best of the non-fiiting icons. I overlooked this in my first review. I would now say we should think about this icon as well.

We have done such statistical calculations with data of systematical test studies. We manipulated the degree of difference within the iconset. The test proved to produce reliable results with about 30 participants in a random online-sample. Less participants are sufficient when the sample is hand-selected. So we can assume that the results in all languages are valid.

I am willing to support you (and anyone else), if you are interested in calculating statistical values and thereby are willing to help to improve the test. Just contact me.

I believe that the three icons “Change sort order”, “Select aggregation mode” and “Select view appearance (theme)” add to much clutter to the interface (furthermore I cannot configure them away as in the usual toolbars). These items should be in the “Settings” menu. Who is pressing these buttons regularly? I only pressed them the first time that I saw them and after the initial configuration I never pressed them again. If they are in the menus, then one can still add them to the regular toolbar if they are needed.

The icon test could be improved with the following addition: display the icons to the user and ask them what they mean (actually this is what users have to do when they use the program: they see icons and they have to guess their meaning and click on the right icon). For example, when I had to choose an icon for “Select view appearance (theme)”, I selected the correct one because no other icon fitted that description, but if the icon were presented and I was asked what it means, I would have never guessed the correct interpretation. In KMail, each time I look at that icon I have to hover the mouse over it to see its description (and similarly for its two neighbours). Unfortunately I am unable to suggest something better for these three icons (I would probably even not have been able to come up with an icon that good).

I think that the cultural differences may also be the result of chance: for example it was pure luck that I selected (in the English test) the correct icon for “Create to-do” (I chose it because no other icon fitted), but I don’t think that the meaning of the icon is obvious. The check-mark in the icon doesn’t have a clear connection to the notion of “To-do” in my opinion. It would be clearer if the icon showed instead of the check-mark a list of items (two or three) with a check-mark before all items except the last one (representing the to-do item that you are adding). I am however not sure if my idea scales well to smaller sizes. Maybe an icon similar to the one in the Buuf or the Buuf Deuce icon set (found on kde-look.org) is better.

Maybe “Forward” could be renamed as “Forward to”.

Have you considered the statistical strength of your conclusions? Did you

(1) set out the statistical tests you would make at the start
(2) calculate the strength of those tests after getting the data
(3) consider the tests as a whole (the net probability of getting an anomalous result from the many tests)

The results are obviously useful in any case, but some of the results might benefit from follow-up.

@Jochen S.: Will publish those after christmas

So I think a sieve (which can filter a lot of different things, such as sand, gravel, soil, …) would fit quite good.

Very interesting results. I’m very interested in the age distribution of Kmail’s users. Could you publish a histogram and/or median and standard deviation?

Thanks
Jochen

when referring to noun it should be translated:
‘Odpowiedź’

when referring to verb in imperative form it should be translated:
‘Odpowiedz’

(the last letter is different)

the second form is more common e.g. outlook is using it.
I’m not sure how it is translated in kmail. Maybe only it was not translated correctly in this usability test. I’ll check at home.