Documents display / grouping

[charlesyoung]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_Mkx7BRUWFhuKzrh-XWIC9D6S1ZIClQBxMZrO0Dr6bE/edit#

Document display and grouping specs to be added here.

cc @jedm @SamCCSI @anjesh

[bizaybsnt]

Hi @charlesyoung, The grouping of documents has been implemented and deployed in the staging. https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=copper

The associated contracts are nested inside the main contracts and their weightage score has been shown alongside (for testing purpose).

The default sorting of the contract documents is based on the weightage of the document where pdf string and annotation text is given less priority,

We have greyed out the main contracts whose score is 0 i.e it is not the part of free-text search but is obtained via free text search from its associated contracts, This can be seen in this link. https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=copper&page=16

While grouping, we found that some associated contracts do not have their main contracts. How would you like to incorporate those documents? These documents are left out for now. For example: Burundi Mining Metallurgy International, Musongati, Concession, 2014 can't be found via a new free-text search. Old search: https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/search?q=burundi New search: https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=burundi

Can you please check these things? Please let us know if there is any confusion in the implementation.

cc: @anjesh

[charlesyoung]

Many thanks @bizaybsnt The staging site seems down, below initial comments. Will test when up and running again.

Couple points.

1. Can you send me the list associated documents on the Prod site that don't have a main document.
2. Change '(Associate Contract)' text to '(Associate Document)'.
3. Change the blue text to something much more subtle.

cc @SamCCSI @jedm

[charlesyoung]

Site seems to be working again. I changed the resource for 1 main contract from hydrocarbon to gold and ran a search for hydrocarbon documents. The main contract is now greyed out so that works well.

[SamCCSI]

2. Would “Associated document” be better? That is consistent with our terminology.

3. Propose that associated doc text colour be the same as main doc. The indentation seems to me sufficient differentiation, and then it would help illustrate why zero relevance main docs are greyed out.

[charlesyoung]

Agree on both points.

[bizaybsnt]

@charlesyoung @SamCCSI

• The text '(Associate Contract)' has been changed to '(Associate Document)'.

• The associated doc text color has been changed same as the main doc.

[charlesyoung]

Thanks. Can you however please change the text to ‘Associated document’ (with a d).

[bizaybsnt]

The text is written as (Associated document) in the portal. Apologies for mistyped in the above comment.

[charlesyoung]

Thanks. Is this working on the entire Staging site or only for your query?

Can you send me the list associated documents on the Prod site that don't have a main document.

[bizaybsnt]

@charlesyoung This is working for every query in the staging site. Please notice that the URL must include gsearch instead of search keyword. Existing search URL: https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/search?q=copper New grouping search URL: https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=copper

We will soon send you the list of associated documents on the Prod site that don't have the main document.

[bizaybsnt]

@charlesyoung Here is the list of associated documents supporting-document-without-main.xlsx

The parent document for these associated document can be added from the url : http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/3190/edit where 3190 is document id

[charlesyoung]

Thanks @bizaybsnt

Can you please add a column to the xls noting if its a RC or OLC document.

[bizaybsnt]

@charlesyoung Here it is. supporting-document-without-main~category.xlsx

[charlesyoung]

Thanks.

What query did you run to get the results? We can only add a main or associated document and if you select the latter you have to provide the main documents details to move on.

[anjesh]

i had discussion internally and there are issues with the data. We are not sure how they appear like that. These situations might have been there since the very beginning and we didn't have any problem with that so far because those relations are not followed strictly.

http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/3190/edit is associated and doesn't have main.

This http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4054 shows that http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4053 is main contract and yet http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4053/edit is set as associated contract.

These data anomalies need to be explored and handled separately.

[jedm]

Dear @anjesh,

I am posting our other questions and comments about the display and grouping today, but one question for now:

Does the new display show ALL ASSOCIATED DOCS THAT MATCH THE SEARCH? Or only the first Associated Doc that matches?

(We are pretty sure the answer is all, but there were many single matches so we were not certain.)

Thank you. Other comments coming soon.

Jed

On Nov 26, 2019, at 11:35 PM, Anjesh notifications@github.com wrote:

 i had discussion internally and there are issues with the data. We are not sure how they appear like that. These situations might have been there since the very beginning and we didn't have any problem with that so far because those relations are not followed strictly.

http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/3190/edit is associated and doesn't have main.

This http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4054 shows that http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4053 is main contract and yet http://admin.resourcecontracts.org/contract/4053/edit is set as associated contract.

These data anomalies need to be explored and handled separately.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[charlesyoung]

Created a separate ticket for associated documents without a main document. #1256

[jedm]

Comments and requests from @charlesyoung @SamCCSI and myself re. new grouping/display:

GLOBAL CHANGE TO LEFT COLUMN ON LIST/RESULTS PAGES

1. Remove blue “document” icon in left column (GLOBAL CHANGE, ALL PAGES)

ADD EXPAND/COLLAPSE FUNCTION TO MASTER/ASSOCIATED DOC GROUPING

2. When list/result has a Master Doc and any Associated Docs, add arrow icon with “expand/collapse” positions in first column
3. Grouping of Master/Associated Docs should be expanded by default
4. User can collapse Grouping and hide Associated Docs (will also hide “View other documents” message)

See previous requests in Google: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_Mkx7BRUWFhuKzrh-XWIC9D6S1ZIClQBxMZrO0Dr6bE/edit#bookmark=id.h9v2nchh94mg

ORDER OF ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

5. Associated Documents should always be ordered chronologically by signature date (most recent to least recent by signature date) Please confirm this is possible even when Master Docs are listed by search weighting

See previous requests in Google: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_Mkx7BRUWFhuKzrh-XWIC9D6S1ZIClQBxMZrO0Dr6bE/edit#bookmark=id.h9v2nchh94mg

FONT SIZE

6. Please confirm that all results/items in lists are same font size (ie, Associated Docs should display in same font size as Master Docs)

CHANGE FORMAT AND DISPLAY OF NEW “View other documents” LINK

7. Indent “View other documents” text and align with Associated Doc above it
8. Add line wrapping
9. Change font style of “View other documents” message so that system message does not look the same as document title: See attached image for suggested format.
10. Change “associate” to “associated” in message

See attached image for reference

ViewAllMsg.pdf

[charlesyoung]

@bizaybsnt @anjesh have you had time to look at @jedm above comments?

[charlesyoung]

@bizaybsnt @anjesh have you had time to look at @jedm above comments?

[anjesh]

yes, we will get back by Tuesday.

[bizaybsnt]

@jedm @charlesyoung The requested features in https://github.com/NRGI/resourcecontracts.org/issues/1096#issuecomment-559347074 have been deployed in the staging server. Please verify from your side and let us know.

cc: @anjesh

[charlesyoung]

Starting to look good.

@jedm look at below example.

https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=&country%5B%5D=TN

[jedm]

Hi @bizaybsnt and @charlesyoung. Agree it is starting to look very good! Here are some remaining questions:

GLOBAL CHANGE TO LEFT COLUMN ON LIST/RESULTS PAGES Remove blue “document” icon in left column (GLOBAL CHANGE, ALL PAGES)

Has this change been made on staging? The blue "document" icon appears in some conditions but not in others.

To confirm: Request it to remove blue document icon globally.

ORDER OF ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

5. Associated Documents should always be ordered chronologically by signature date (most recent to least recent by signature date) Please confirm this is possible even when Master Docs are listed by search weighting

I reviewed a few pages and it seems like this order is working:

• Master Doc listed by relevance
• followed by Associated Docs listed by signature

Please confirm.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:

For each contract Summary page (see example here), we proposed adding the Master Doc name at top of the "ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS" section. @charlesyoung @SamCCSI do we still want to do that?

[SamCCSI]

@jedm yes I believe so.

also, small point but would it be more intuitive if the arrow icon to left of the title pointed to the right, rather than above, when the grouping is contracted (i.e. not collapsed)?

[jedm]

Agree with @samccsi suggestion.

On Dec 12, 2019, at 3:31 PM, SamCCSI notifications@github.com wrote:

@jedm yes I believe so.

also, small point but would it be more intuitive if the arrow icon to left of the title pointed to the right, rather than above, when the grouping is contracted (i.e. not collapsed)? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NRGI/resourcecontracts.org/issues/1096?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAQNZQHL66QNOCSXQWEP2WLQYKNQVA5CNFSM4ESYSQB2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEGX56IA#issuecomment-565174048, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAQNZQAMWUKHDCMI5KZYGRLQYKNQVANCNFSM4ESYSQBQ.

[anjesh]

Has this change been made on staging? The blue "document" icon appears in some conditions but not in others.

"blue document icon" appears in https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/search?q=, and this page will be replaced by https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q= (note gsearch). We create new search page so that old search remains as it is. Do you see any other instances where blue icon is seen besides that?

I reviewed a few pages and it seems like this order is working:

Master Doc listed by relevance followed by Associated Docs listed by signature Please confirm.

Yes, confirmed. Note that we are showing score in the result page. That will be removed once we confirm the working of the search page.

also, small point but would it be more intuitive if the arrow icon to left of the title pointed to the right, rather than above, when the grouping is contracted (i.e. not collapsed)?

• [ ] change arrow icon to left (with array pointed to right) rather than above when the grouping is contracted.

For each contract Summary page (see example here), we proposed adding the Master Doc name at top of the "ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS" section. @charlesyoung @SamCCSI do we still want to do that?

What do we do with this?

[charlesyoung]

@jedm is below what you mean (it does show main doc)?

cc @SamCCSI @anjesh

[jedm]

Hi @charlesyoung @anjesh

We should confirm that:

1) The Main Contract displays this way on ITS OWN PAGE 2) YI can add an indentation for the Associated Documents — this will be important for teaching the user that the relationship between documents shown in the list/search results (the previous page they were on) is the same relationship shown here.

J.

On Dec 13, 2019, at 4:35 AM, Charles Young notifications@github.com wrote:

@jedm https://github.com/jedm is below what you mean (it does show main doc)?

https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/13888372/70788948-b0680e80-1d9a-11ea-8ae0-5c965b9c3532.png cc @SamCCSI https://github.com/SamCCSI @anjesh https://github.com/anjesh — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NRGI/resourcecontracts.org/issues/1096?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAQNZQFWCCYVOC2GOMCKQOLQYNJOVA5CNFSM4ESYSQB2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEGZN77A#issuecomment-565370876, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAQNZQBZYKCWCCEIFVLGWG3QYNJOVANCNFSM4ESYSQBQ.

[charlesyoung]

@anjesh @jedm what is still outstanding on this ticket?

Noticed that if you click on a main doc the associated list of docs are first collapsed before the main doc is opened. Not sure if this is a UX problem.

cc @SamCCSI

[jedm]

@anjesh @jedm what is still outstanding on this ticket?

@anjesh What items in this ticket is YI still completing?

@charlesyoung do you agree that we can change the Associated Docs section of Contract Summary page as requested?

[charlesyoung]

@jedm does that relate to adding the Master Doc name at top of the Associated Documents section?

We currently have the Master Doc name at the top of the list if active on an Associated Document. Do we want to show the Master Doc name at the top of the list even if a user is on the Master Doc? We could add an indentation for the Associated Documents as you suggest.

[jedm]

Hi Charles - yes, that’s exactly what I would suggest. Adding both the name and the indentation.

On Jan 8, 2020, at 2:27 AM, Charles Young notifications@github.com wrote:

@jedm https://github.com/jedm does that relate to adding the Master Doc name at top of the Associated Documents section?

We currently have the Master Doc name at the top of the list if active on an Associated Document. Do we want to show the Master Doc name at the top of the list even if a user is on the Master Doc? We could add an indentation for the Associated Documents as you suggest.

https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/13888372/71958256-81598700-31f8-11ea-8869-4be566345480.png — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NRGI/resourcecontracts.org/issues/1096?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAQNZQDFHYM63J23UIAOZJLQ4V55ZA5CNFSM4ESYSQB2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEILOENQ#issuecomment-571925046, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAQNZQF4XA4JHHMFD7S6BKTQ4V55ZANCNFSM4ESYSQBQ.

[charlesyoung]

@bizaybsnt @anjesh can above be done?

Also what is still outstanding on this ticket?

[charlesyoung]

Something has gone wrong on the staging site. See below.

[man-git007]

@charlesyoung We have deployed the display/ grouping in the staging server. Please check and provide feedback if any.

cc @anjesh

[charlesyoung]

We have seemed to have lost the grouping unless there is a caching issue.

[anjesh]

Are you looking at the right URL https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=&page=2? The original search page url is not updated yet.

[charlesyoung]

Yep, seems to be a caching issue. Works in an incognito window.

[charlesyoung]

Thanks @anjesh, looks good to me. @jedm you happy with what has been implemented?

I should know this but why are we not showing the search results count on the top right of the page? Was it a filtering / technical issue?

@jedm below has also been implemented.

@SamCCSI please note once this is deployed to the OLC prod site the associated docs without a main doc wont be shown.

[charlesyoung]

@man-git007 I get a crash when running a free text search.

URL: https://staging.resourcecontracts.org/gsearch?q=&country%5B%5D=TN&resource%5B%5D=Hydrocarbons

Free text search: hydrocarbon

cc @jedm

[charlesyoung]

We need to run a free text searching to test the proposed 'View other documents' link works. Free text search when only some of the associated documents match the search but we still want to indicate that the result is part of a larger set of documents.

[man-git007]

@charlesyoung The free text search issue has been resolved

[charlesyoung]

Thanks @man-git007

@jedm can you please test the free text searching. See below.

[charlesyoung]

One last thing.

When you click on an associated document the correct headings (main) and indentation (associated) on the summary page is presented. Its however inconsistent when clicking on a main document summary page as well on the 'View x other document(s)' link.

cc @jedm

[charlesyoung]

@man-git007 will it be possible to look at above comment? Should be the last feedback on this ticket.

[man-git007]

@charlesyoung In the summary page, related/associated contracts are shown excluding the contract itself. If the summary page is of the main contract then only associated contracts are shown with indentation. Since the main contract is not shown, the UI seems to look inconsistent but indentation is there on the summary page. Correct if anything I am missing or not understanding.

Main Contract summary page

Associated Contract summary page

[jedm]

Thank you Manish.

For the Main Contract Summary page, we have requested in the notes above to include the Main Contract (greyed out) in the appropriate position above the Associated Document list. Is this possible?

We believe this will help for both consistency and to better illustrate the Main/Associated relationship.

On Jan 20, 2020, at 3:18 AM, Manish Pradhan notifications@github.com wrote:

 @charlesyoung In the summary page, related/associated contracts are shown excluding the contract itself. If the summary page is of the main contract then only associated contracts are shown with indentation. Since the main contract is not shown, the UI seems to look inconsistent but indentation is there on the summary page. Correct if anything I am missing or not understanding.

Main Contract summary page

Associated Contract summary page

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[charlesyoung]

@man-git007 just checking that you received above message from @jedm

That is only outstanding issue on this ticket.

[SamCCSI]

@SamCCSI please note once this is deployed to the OLC prod site the associated docs without a main doc wont be shown.

Understood, thanks Charles.