Simplifying Git microcopy to foster designer-developer collaboration.

Wix • Codux

My role:: UX writing, terminology, accessibility
Team:: Product manager, technical writer, front-end developers
Constraints:: Concepts had to maintain technical accuracy for developers.
Result:: 73% of users completed a Git action.

Introduction

Codux was a low-code, visual editor developed by Wix. It integrated Git and allowed designers and front-end developers to asynchronously collaborate on the same projects.

The problem

User research showed that designers frequently had to pause their workflow to look up Git concepts. They didn't understand most of the terminology, and the existing microcopy added by the development team was too technical and difficult to follow.

Addressing the target audience

I had to rewrite the existing microcopy for all user types:

Technical — developers or full-stack designers who already understand Git.
Semi-technical — junior developers using Codux as a learning tool.
Non-technical — designers with little or no technical background.

To support all 3 groups, the microcopy needed to be:

Contextual
Guiding
Technically accurate

Auditing the UI copy

To identify what needed improvement, I mapped the existing microcopy and user flows in FigJam.

Organising the content into logical sections made it easier to align with the product team and move quickly into implementation.

FigJam board grouping existing microcopy by user flow — The content audit mapped in FigJam.

Researching Git-based competitors

Competitors like GitHub and Abstract rely heavily on documentation. They don't offer any supporting microcopy within their applications.

GitHub, Abstract, and other Git guidance reviewed during competitor research

I compiled a list of references, including Codux's own documentation, and consulted with the technical writing team to ensure consistent terminology. For example, always using "repository" instead of "repo".

To better understand designers' mental models, I also reviewed articles explaining Git specifically for design audiences.

Explaining Git for everyone

I updated the microcopy across Codux to explain Git features more clearly, using language accessible to all user types while staying aligned with Wix's style guidelines.

Commit changes

Before: a long explanation of commits and pushing. After: “Record the changes you made on this branch with a commit. Your changes will remain local until you sync.” — The original and updated "commit your changes" modal.

I avoided terms like "save" and "snapshot", which designers and developers interpret differently. I also recommended adding floating labels to improve accessibility.

Research showed designers needed reassurance that their changes would not go live at this stage, so I made that explicit.

Revert changes

The confirmation modal repeated information and used vague references like "this file", which was inaccurate because the modal could be triggered from multiple entry points.

I removed redundant text, and switched to change-based terminology, which better reflects what users care about.

Resolve conflicts

Before: a long technical explanation of conflicts. After: “Accept changes and resolve this conflict. Someone worked on the same files and lines as you. To resolve this conflict, you have to accept their changes and overwrite yours.” — The original and updated "resolve conflicts" modal.

Codux offered very limited conflict-resolution capabilities compared to its competitors like GitHub. Users could not resolve conflicts individually.

The product team wanted to encourage users to accept others' changes, so I clarified the impact of doing so and removed inaccurate details.

Before: “Are you sure you want to abort conflict?” After: “Cancel? You’ll keep your changes but you won’t be able to sync this branch.” — The original and updated confirmation modal that cancels "resolve conflicts".

The cancellation modal for conflict resolution was also confusing because both CTAs were unclear. I made the title and body copy more direct and concise.

Impact

Before these changes, only 6% of active users consistently performed Git actions. 8 weeks after the updated microcopy was released, this increased significantly.

73% increase

users doing Git actions

37% increase

shared Git projects

Further improvements

The Git-related microcopy remained static for all users, regardless of their experience level. A future enhancement could be adaptive microcopy that adjusts based on a user's role or familiarity with coding.