search

hasadna / avid-covider

MIT License
23 stars 8 forks source link

design a component to display a summary of previous answers + option to update previous answers #253

Open noamoss opened 4 years ago

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@mushon following our slack discussion in which you shared this draft:

image

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@mushon (opened this design specific issue. Feel free to add your comments and thoughts, but I think we should first finalize the general plan on #254)

mushon commented 4 years ago

My thoughts here was that you would actually need to check all of these and if one of them isn't checked we will ask you only about that

noamoss commented 4 years ago

default balance - it would much easier to leave things as is. I think we must push users to actively approve there was not change.

mushon commented 4 years ago

this is exactly what I meant. You would need to check all of these to confirm there was no change. Check this: image

mushon commented 4 years ago

BTW, I agree we should do it only for consecutive days, through that we may also create an additional incentive for daily reporting…

mushon commented 4 years ago

image

Updated in Zeplin: https://app.zeplin.io/project/5e74f33aec70626a34e66595/screen/5eb17fb8e353e71b0123fec1/ https://app.zeplin.io/project/5e74f33aec70626a34e66595/screen/5eb17fb8c67343b0adca5258/ https://app.zeplin.io/project/5e74f33aec70626a34e66595/screen/5eb17fb86979f51b378f9f5b/

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@akariv FYI ^^^

I will now work on spec for next week

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@mushon I suggest to simpify the wording a bit:

(this will save the need for technical instructions and telling the consequences of checking/unchecking each detail). + we can give up the "אין שינוי" label when the option is not selected - or totally (to save the hassle of long strings covering it)

Any objection? If not, can you update the design?

akariv commented 4 years ago

Would be good to show how a more complex situation would look like (e.g. has 3 symptoms, met 3 adults and 3 kids). Also, worth mentioning that while some items fall into the "are you in the same situation as yesterday" concept, for other questions it seems forced.

For example, the temperature question might work ok for the 'didn't take my temperature', but will work poorly for when I did take my temperature and there's no reason the measurement will be identical to yesterday. Same for the 'met with X people' question - if I never meet anybody then it makes sense, but if I meet people during the day it makes little sense to ask 'yesterday you met with 2 people, is it still the case today'

noamoss commented 4 years ago

correct. We thought to limit this mechanism to only some of the daily (...and weekly) questions.

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:26 PM Adam Kariv notifications@github.com wrote:

Would be good to show how a more complex situation would look like (e.g. has 3 symptoms, met 3 adults and 3 kids). Also, worth mentioning that while some items fall into the "are you in the same situation as yesterday" concept, for other questions it seems forced.

For example, the temperature question might work ok for the 'didn't take my temperature', but will work poorly for when I did take my temperature and there's no reason the measurement will be identical to yesterday. Same for the 'met with X people' question - if I never meet anybody then it makes sense, but if I meet people during the day it makes little sense to ask 'yesterday you met with 2 people, is it still the case today'

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hasadna/avid-covider/issues/253#issuecomment-624843095, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA3KOLK7W46Y6R7MV7LHVQDRQG2WZANCNFSM4MQALOFQ .

mushon commented 4 years ago

and beyond that, limit it to the more "nothing unusual to report" type of scenario.

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@akariv @mushon see my idea for implementation at https://github.com/hasadna/avid-covider/issues/310.

@mushon I think the "ללא שינוי" label should be displayed only when the item is checked, otherwise, it might misleading.

mushon commented 4 years ago

@mushon I think the "ללא שינוי" label should be displayed only when the item is checked, otherwise, it might misleading.

not sure I understand, the "אין שינוי" label is what you confirm with the checkbox. It's the oldest pattern on the web, what's misleading about it?

noamoss commented 4 years ago

I claim that a clear and descriptive question should serve the purpose (like "מה מהפרטים הבאים נכון גם היום?", see https://github.com/hasadna/avid-covider/issues/310#issue-615132417 for full description) the reporter will click/check the relevant facts. Showing the label "ללא שינוי" is not a must - and might confuse, as we are not using this pattern anywhere else in the tool. In other words: the user might think that by not clicking he/she confirms the fact. Showing the "ללא שינוי" label AFTER checking the box, and hiding it again after unchecking the box - is a way to ensure the user understood the new mechanism.

mushon commented 4 years ago

I actually think it is less clear with your suggestion. Let’s have @akariv decide.

noamoss commented 4 years ago

@akariv ^^^^