New Hotel Room Finder: Testing Opportunity

[ryan1]

@len

Let me know if it would would be more intuitive to put that explanation on another part of the page.

I’ll admit, since the text was small, it felt more like a footnote and I didn’t read it. Even so, I wasn’t sure what it meant to apply filters “top down” (I do now that you explained it)…although the second sentence does make it clearer (if I had read it!).

One possibility is that if you make a filter selection that resets other filters, to pop-up a message warning the user of this so that they don’t do it inadvertently and lose their prior selections. “Changing room type now will clear the following filters: Floor, Walking Distance. Do you wish to proceed?” Or something like that. Maybe?

[ryan1]

@linsalt

Ideally then all filters would need to be visible at the same time.

I think this becomes particularly important if selecting one filter can clear/reset others!

[ryan1]

@len

by looking at Walking Distance to Transportation

I assumed you were going to each and every room on Disney property and timing how long it takes you to walk to Transportation and the Lobby. I’m disappointed that isn’t the case!

[janamelia]

@len

Then you change filter C. In what order should I re-apply the filters? I can see at least these options that people would expect:

• C, A, B, D, E (C is the most recently changed filter)
• A, B, C, D, E (your original order, with a different option for C)
• A, B, D, E, C (C is the last filter changed)

The middle option is the way my mind works.
I’m thinking a poll - Liners luv 'em - might provide guidance.

Same with default = reset
Equal in my mind

[janamelia]

@ryan1

I’m disappointed that isn’t the case

You’re being humorous, yes? I thought the math, with kids on vacation even, was inspired.

[ryan1]

@janamelia

You’re being humorous, yes?

Yes. For sure. (Can you even imagine if that was the case!)

@janamelia

the math…was inspired

Indeed!

[janamelia]

Just confirming

[len]

@ryan1 This is an example of a more general error when displaying the number of matching rooms per building. Thanks for catching this.

[len]

I’ve also adjusted the font size and margins so that all of the filters fit on one desktop screen:

That’ll be in the next release, probably tomorrow morning. Will post when that’s done.

[SirGreggLadyV]

@ryan1

so that they don’t do it inadvertently and lose their prior selections. “Changing room type now will clear the following filters: Floor, Walking Distance. Do you wish to proceed?” Or something like that.

Agree that this would be great.

[len]

Just so everyone knows what we’re talking about, here’s a diagram of the rooms we’re talking about (AKL Jambo rooms 4316 - 4328):

The rooms in the pink Savannah View group are 4316, 4318, and 4320. They’re definitely labeled as Savannah View by Disney.

Rooms 4322 to 4328 and 4341 to 4349 are definitely labeled Resort View by Disney.

The feeding pit is the pink oval labeled “Pit.”

I get why 4341 to 4349 are labeled Resort View - the pit is the thing directly in your view. And I could see the same reasoning for 4324 to 4328.

Why is 4320 Savannah View and 4322 Resort View, when they’re next to each other?

Here’s the view from 4320:

And here’s the view from 4322:

Those look pretty close to the same to me. It’s like the two people who took those photos were standing in almost exactly the same spot.

I’m not sure how to explain the Savannah View vs Resort View here. It’s a judgement call on Disney’s part.

I think this goes back to the reason why we have the room finder - so you can see these kinds of edge cases in cost and have that research pay off in better view-per-dollar.

[len]

Thank you @tiggerpal. Your subscription runs through the end of the decade now.

[PrincipalTinker]

Years ago those roms were always assigned as “standard” view. It appears Disney could have reclassified them?

[len]

@missoverexcited I see what you mean here. (Also, your subscription runs through the end of the decade now.)

Pick Room Type = “River View”
Pick “Additional View” = “Water View”

Then the only option available for some other filters are “Any”.

I might be able to hide any filter that only has the “Any” choice. That would make the overall size of the filters smaller and be clearer. Let me know what you think about that idea.

cc @ryan1 and @janamelia for your thoughts on this.

[missoverexcited]

I think that would definitely be clearer. It was the illusion of choice but not getting any choice that was confusing.

And thank you!

[len]

Thanks Mike! Your subscription now runs through the end of the decade.

Both of these issues will be addressed in the next update, and I’ll post here when that’s done.

Let me know what you think about the proposal around post 172 to hide any filter whose only choice is “Any”.

[ryan1]

@len

I might be able to hide any filter that only has the “Any” choice. That would make the overall size of the filters smaller and be clearer. Let me know what you think about that idea.

I love this, personally. Because I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gone to filter a category, only to be told there is nothing to filter!!!

I can see the counter-argument…that is, what if you didn’t even know there was a way to filter on one of those categories before you selected something else? That’s where fitting as many of the filters on the screen as possible in the most-used order makes the most sense. But, I would prefer not to even see the filter option if there is nothing for me to filter on!

[janamelia]

@len

hide any filter that only has the “Any” choice. That

Cleans up your product nicely, imo.

[janamelia]

@ryan1

where fitting as many of the filters on the screen as possible in the most-used order makes the most sense

Possibly this is a small audience

If the majority of the potential users aren’t well versed in looking for rooms, won’t they happily go with what’s offered?

[ryan1]

@janamelia

small audience