Protocol tool - VWSL

[lornalittle]

1) As a hydrological scientist, I need a tool to define a protocol for a new experiment so that it can be shared on the VWSL with other scientists. (Like the workflow below)

[lornalittle]

2) As a hydrological scientist, I need to edit my already existing protocol so that it can be a living document throughout the experiment (shared with other collaborating scientists).

[lornalittle]

3) As a hydrological scientist, I want to upload the final (not-editable) version of my living protocol so that it can be reviewed by other scientists.

[lornalittle]

Fields that should be filled in (related to first userstory above):

And:

[beekhuiz]

Mockup of the start screen where users can see an overview of all the 'ongoing' experiment protocols and can add a new protocol, edit existing protocols or publish (how? needed?) a protocol.

[beekhuiz]

First basic (almost working version) of the protocol. I will continue working on the dynamic form elements, such as adding multiple partners or experiment steps. We should first focus on what data should be stored by the form.

[lornalittle]

Looks great! All the data entered should be stored. From my user perspective, 2) Data requirements, 3) Experiment execution, and 4) Result reporting and format should be editable. These three sections should be editable under the 'Participate' page of the VWSL (related to userstory 2 above).

[lornalittle]

Experiment execution steps should also include - responsible partner, deadline (for each step).

[lornalittle]

Data requirements - each data set needs all four fields. Can we have a button to 'add new data requirements' and it includes the four fields.

[lornalittle]

Add a date to show which version is shown in the edit/publish section, and/OR when edits are made, an email is automatically sent to the lead partner, highlighting the section that was updated.

[rcapell]

Examples for the "Data requirements" section:

• discharge time series for one or several sites, properties then could include information on time series length, other necessary metadata, additional files (eg a location shape file)...
• a model tool, properties are then version number or certain model routines to be included in the distributed version

It might actually be better to call the section "Experient requirements"?, because partners could have responsibility to contribute with model code or other contributions which are not exactly "data".

[albertomontanari]

It is indeed great! I suggest some modifications in the picture below, please see if you agree. Thanks! Alberto

[lornalittle]

Yes, I agree with Alberto's modifications. Thank you!!

[lornalittle]

Note: the '(eg. data collection, scripts, models, tools)' should be written in grey suggestion text in the description box.

The '+ add more' should bring up everything included in the *range

[lornalittle]

Note: Should be 3) Experiment Execution Steps (not 2))

[lornalittle]

[lornalittle]

The first version looks great!! Fun to test. Can it please have the text inside the boxes above (such as eg. findings) in a grey colour? So there are examples of the information that should be filled in

[lornalittle]

When I try to add a data requirement, it doesnt work

[lornalittle]

When I try to add experiment execution steps, it doesnt add anything to the right side (same as data requirement)

[lornalittle]

Nice warning that it is about to be published!

[lornalittle]

Add Organisation box to 1) Partners, to also show in the table. Table should have two columns: Name, Organisation

[lornalittle]

http://water-switch-on.eu.preview.binero.se/virtual-laboratories-new-opportunities-for-collaborative-water-science/

An example of how the completed, final protocol could look like!

[lornalittle]

Please use the same entrance page layout and style as for the upload tool http://www.water-switch-on.eu/sip-webclient/odrtool/

[lornalittle]

'Export' should be renamed 'Download PDF' - if this is what happens? When I click publish, there is no warning. Can I please have a warning?

[lornalittle]

'Publish' should be 'Non-editable' under action. Status can be published.

[lornalittle]

The user should only be able to click actions/take action on a protocol, if they are partners of that project. But this comes later maybe.

[rcnijzink]

I don't really understand the 'Non-editable' button; I think it should be 'Make non-editable', but 'Publish' was also fine for me. Now it is not very clear anymore what it actually does. I expect now a protocol which looks similar to when I click 'edit', but then with the fields-grayed out and the status remaining still 'in progress'. But we should discuss this.

[rcnijzink]

I think "2 Data & Method preparation" should maybe be "2 Data & Method Preparation Steps", so what we discussed last week. This to make more clear that this is also a workflow.

[lornalittle]

Remove the '(e.g. data collection, scripts, models, tools) after the title 2) Data and Method Preparation Steps. It is covered in the grey text in the boxes

[lornalittle]

The 'Non-editable' button should be called 'Make Non Editable'.

[lornalittle]

'Submit' in the editable protocol should be 'Save'. The 'Make Non-Editable' button should be in the editable protocol (for later date).

[lornalittle]

When I add more than a few words to the 'Description' box, I currently have to scroll. It should be text wrapping, with a fixed column width

[beekhuiz]

I made the textboxes in the form one 'row' larger, and only adjustable in height. Making the textbox automatically increase in size when the user enters more text is a bit more complicated.

[lornalittle]

Can you change experiment name to 'Experiment Full Name' and add a box beneath it called 'Short Name'

[lornalittle]

INstead od 'Description' at every step, can this be 'Task'.

For Data and Method Preparation steps - can we change 'Description' to 'Task' and 'Properties' to 'Description'

[lornalittle]

This tool looks great, should make the protocols much more accessible!

[lornalittle]

When a new item is added the Description box is not emptied for the new item. It should be.

[lornalittle]

We want to start using the tool - can the test protocols be deleted? And a function to delete/clean up the list?

[lornalittle]

The suggestion of having to send an email to the lead partner and get approved before you can edit: The lead partner has to check a box (similar to how you can select 'lead' at the moment) in the participant list to give this email account the rights to edit the on-going protocol.

The procedure could be to: • New partner can only insert name as partner in the protocol, all other functionality is blocked as default. • When potential partners sign up, an email is sent to lead partner that he needs to approve the new partner. • When new partner is approved (for instance by lead partner ticking the check box in the protocol) he then has rights to edit also the other items in the protocol within the

[lornalittle]

The text in the green box could read: Welcome to the protocol tool. Here you can create new protocols, edit existing experiment protocols, or view on-going and completed protocols.

[lornalittle]

Footer as below added to bottom of form (not floating!)

[lornalittle]

In the Review table, the heading should read Review and Repeat (not Repeat and Review)

[lornalittle]

'Make non editable' should be renamed 'Send to 'Review or Repeat''. With tool tip that explains this makes it non editable