Open woodruffr opened 1 month ago
Note the issues that were fixed in the mark-up and will be in today's deliery:
-For PIPE9A the text doesn't seem to be piped. ==> This is fixed. -Untranslated text in SMMAR8 ==> This is fixed. -In general, our text seems to always be before number and text boxes. Can we move them to the proper places? ==> I think we'll need to have a discussion with NCI on this. Both NCI Word doc instructions and IMS markdown coding have not been consistent within and across surveys. A lot of the text placement in our markdown (most were coded before Deepti and I came on board) are NOT consistent with the Word doc. I'm not sure if NCI asked us to move the text to before/after the text boxes once they started their testing, or they were moved by IMS on our own.
English M1: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown is consistent with Word doc. English M2: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown has text before the text boxes. English M3: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown has text before the text boxes. English M4: In general, text placement is mixed and so is the markdown. Spanish M1: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown is consistent with Word doc. Spanish M2: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown is consistent with Word doc. Spanish M3: In general, Word doc has text after the text boxes. Markdown has text before the text boxes. Spanish M4: In general, text placement is mixed and so is the markdown.
@cusackjm @cunnaneaq The issues for this scenario have been fixed, but a question about the consistency of text and text box order came up. We looked through the baseline surveys to see if there was a pattern and it looks like in some cases we may need to update the markup to match the Word doc whereas in others the Word doc needs to be updated or we can stick with a mix as it is now. Do you have any thoughts on this? I'll ask my team for an estimate on the level of effort to update the ones that are inconsistent in the meantime.
This can get addressed in the August release, we need to meet the July deadline
Per our call today, NCI will add the text box order question to their list of user considerations from their retreat to see if this is something we want to address in the future (would be after the August prod push).
Issues found in dev testing of Spanish Module 3 Scenario 14:
For NCI (attached Scenario showing responses) dev_testing_MOD 3_Spanish_Scenario14_20240718.xlsx
-On Line 153, SECSMLFG is listed as an option. As the age of the subject is 60, my understanding is that the user would not be shown that option on the table. -On line 167, for SMMAR8, the value in the document is 69. As that's above the subject's age of 60, that's not a possible value, so this might be a typo in the scenario. -For TOMAr9A, the text next to the box is in all caps but isn't anywhere else. Is this correct? -Very minor but line 214 has "si" in lower case in the scenario. -On line 243 (EAMAR10) the piped text in the scenario says "consumia" but since EAMAR5 is 1, I think the piped text should be "consume."
For IMS (documenting for mark-up changes in deliveries) -In general, our text seems to always be before number and text boxes. Can we move them to the proper places? -For PIPE9A the text doesn't seem to be piped. -Untranslated text in SMMAR8