-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Create Figma wireframes for the plan builder #32
Comments
Notes from team meeting: Uploaded plans will be integrated into the full plan builder. Writing plans via the DMP Tool is the priority workflow rather than uploading. Decided not to move forward with the ability to modify dates/other information from the downloaded plan. We'll revist this later if needed. |
Hey All, We have completed the wireframes for the Plan Creator and flow Video Walkthrough Prototypes Misc.
We went back and forward on the Requirements vs Guidance vs "Best Practice"- We looked at a lot of the real guidance so we tried to show "realistic-ish" amount of text and there is a lot of variations - we have tried to balance out not wanting to overwhelm the users on first "open", but also we tried to avoid hiding it away behind accordions etc Let us know your general thoughts, and we can think about how we might make separate cards for screens or collection of screens for more feedback. Edit: Credit to Zach - All pages have been tagged with a reference name in the "wireframe note" yellow sticky, to make feedback easier |
Thanks @fraserclark As we all go through this to review and provide feedback, how do you want us to structure that? I see you've added a unique name to each slide in the wireframes in the yellow notes, like "Flow create plan", so can I suggest we just group our thoughts our questions by these here on this card, to start? We can always expand to separate cards if things need a bit more room for discussion? Does that work Ok for everyone else? |
Yep, open to whatever works best for people. I can see the value in splitting off the big topics into separate cards where required. Appreciate there are a ton of screens to review and comment on |
Thanks @fraserclark and @cazinc The video was super helpful and I think things are looking great! I have one comment about the overall flow. You may already have already catalogued this and just not covered in the video (or I missed it). Like phase 1, our ability to provide the 'Project search' is limited to only a handful of funders. We will need to retain that in the new system. We have not yet had any feedback on the related works section from Phase 1. As for Mock projects, I'm not sure. I think we could possibly leave out now that we have introduced new language like 'Draft' and 'Publish' |
@fraserclark I'm really happy with how things are looking and how fast you could turn this around! This set covers a lot, so we will need more time for a comprehensive review. I will write out all of my comments on one card and group them by slide name. As @cazinc noted, from there, I think we can consider breaking them off into separate cards. |
Hey @briri
Project Search However, you are right, the search is missing at the point of "editing a project" - its only available on that initial "create" which is of course wrong - I will update this. |
We've updated the Plan Builder wireframes now to reflect the requirements around Collaborators/Contributors/PIs/comment-only sharing. This has been done in 3 places:
How does this look? I think we'd already merged the concepts of adding PIs into a higher level "Add Collaborators" flow; this really just introduces the option to set a collaborator as comment-only. If memory serves this would be the way for a Researcher to request input not only from a peer but also from a Data Librarian, for example? |
Hi @cazinc, Thanks for the updates. A few comments on Collaborators
![]() |
Hi @mariapraetzellis thanks, we'll start to make some edits to the wireframes. On the "other" role - I worry this won't be clear to users, specifically that the implications for edit rights/comment rights/no rights won't be clear. Is there some other term like "View-only" that matches the requirement? |
Hi @mariapraetzellis we have a few more edits to this ready for review:
|
@cazinc Thanks for the edits. I'd like to discuss the ORCID lookup and defining roles & permissions during our call this morning. The location of the Request Feedback link looks good, and I think it makes sense where you've placed it. |
Hi, I have several updates to the Plan Builder ready for review. These are related to Thursday's discussion about sharing versus feedback versus project roles.
There is no longer any explicit "request feedback" option but from what was discussed in the meeting, I think this is right? I am wondering though if we need to think when Feedback is requested, even if it is automated? Does it happen when the researcher Publishes the Plan (too late?) or if there is some intermediate stage before publishing that makes it clear you are ready for (required) feedback from (a non editable list of org admins/data librarians/whomever)? |
Created a doc for combined feedback from CDL team on latest iteration, please review and we can talk at our next meeting: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PsEiUgg3sPnef2OkKhZd__dplOe5UNmfNLneTxbsHNs/edit#heading=h.cfdy169jiz77 |
As discussed I've now created a dedicated card for feedback on this: #623 |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: