The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the props-bot label.

If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.

Co-authored-by: juanfra <juanfra@git.wordpress.org>
Co-authored-by: dkotter <dkotter@git.wordpress.org>
Co-authored-by: jeffpaul <jeffpaul@git.wordpress.org>

To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook.

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 68.29%. Comparing base (274a2da) to head (3b4574a).

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             develop     #290      +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage      68.31%   68.29%   -0.02%     
  Complexity       812      812              
=============================================
  Files             53       53              
  Lines           3939     3940       +1     
=============================================
  Hits            2691     2691              
- Misses          1248     1249       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

I'll be fixing the tests.

Note we've now merged in #341, which made the decision to remove the generation of multiple titles. As such, the changes in this PR will no longer work. I've leaving this open for the moment to see if there's any feedback you may have @juanfra with this new approach.

Thanks for the ping @dkotter, sorry I missed that. Haven't had time to come back to this.

In terms of UX, I'm a bit concerned about auto-inserting the title. It doesn't give users a chance to preview or dismiss if they don't like the result. They'd have to undo, which feels pretty aggressive.

I think there's still value in having a modal where the user can confirm the suggestion. I feel the flow of "getting a suggestion > regenerate if needed > insert when you're happy" would give users more control and be more predictable. That said, it would be good to have a pattern that's followed in the different experiments (summary, excerpt)

Thoughts?

In terms of UX, I'm a bit concerned about auto-inserting the title. It doesn't give users a chance to preview or dismiss if they don't like the result. They'd have to undo, which feels pretty aggressive.

I think there's still value in having a modal where the user can confirm the suggestion. I feel the flow of "getting a suggestion > regenerate if needed > insert when you're happy" would give users more control and be more predictable. That said, it would be good to have a pattern that's followed in the different experiments (summary, excerpt)

Thoughts?

Yeah, I agree that I like giving the user a clear opportunity to accept a suggestion instead of auto-inserting it. Though that said, this does match what we do in other areas (excerpt generation, summarization, featured image generation) so I don't think it's the worst UX.

But I'm definitely open to reviewing a different approach to this if you want to try tackling that. We're not looking to go back to rendering multiple results but I'm open to bringing back some sort of modal approach that allows the user to approve/re-generate as needed.

Thanks @dkotter. I iterated on what we have now.

Updated the PR to bring back the modal with a layout that adapts well to having only one option (changed the title of the modal as well) and giving the user the chance to insert, regenerate or exit the whole thing without changing (closing the modal).

This looks good to me. Before merging, any thoughts on this new approach @jeffpaul?

Functionally, this isn't all that much different that the existing experience:

So question is a modal better than just directly updating the title, allowing editing there as normal, and relying on undo to roll back to before generation?

Functionally, this isn't all that much different that the existing experience

@jeffpaul the radical difference is user control. With the modal the user can review and discard, regenerate, or insert suggestions. With auto-insert, they lose that control. The title just changes and their only option is undo.

Another problem with the current flow, if the generation takes a few seconds and the user scrolls down or starts editing other content, they might not even notice when the title changes. They could lose their original title without realizing it. At minimum, if we're auto-inserting we should show a toast notice when the title changes.

I believe the proposed changes are providing better UX, though I understand these things can be subjective.