Inconsistent user guidance for creation of new process templates / new processes

Bug #985534 reported by Matthias Ronge on 2012-04-19
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Goobi.Production
Undecided
Unassigned
1.8
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Description:

In the "Current processes", "Create new process" and "Process templates" perspectives, a link once labeled "Create new process" and two times labeled "Create new process template" can be found which, in all cases, leads to one and the same dialog which is titled "Create new process" but creates a new process template (in case that the check-box "is template" is checked; if the box is not checked it creates a stub process which seems useless because neither a physical template nor a workpiece can be added).

When clicking "Create process from this process template" (sheet with blue asterisk icon) in the "Create new process" or "Process templates" perspective, you are led to a different dialog which is titled "Create new process", too, and offers this functionality.

The "Create new process" or "Process templates" perspective contain exactly the same content and show a progress bar which is not interpretable here - a template should not have any progress.

The German translation completes the mess, since "Create new process" is ambiguously displaying as "Einen neuen Vorgang (Produktionsvorlage) anlegen" ["Create a new process (process template)"].

Proposal:

- Remove "Create new process" perspective from the main menu.

- Remove "Create new process" link from the "Current processes" perspective.

- Rename the dialog used to create process templates into "Create new process template"

- Remove the "is template" check-box. Make Goobi.Production automatically set this to "true" for new process templates and to "false" for new processes.

- Hide the "is template" check-box in the "Process details" view, too.

- Remove the progress bar from the "Process templates" perspective.

- Change German translation for "Create new process" into "Einen neuen Vorgang anlegen".

- Update the breadcrumbs of these views and dialogs

Finde ich sinnvoll. War allerdings damals explizit so vom GDZ gefordert.
Die Ansicht in der Navigation ist im Übrigen unterschiedlich für
verschiedene Nutzer und abhängig von der Anzahl der Vorgangsvorlagen.

Ansonsten: I like :)

--
___________________________________________________

M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Software-Entwicklung, Leitung

intranda GmbH
Bertha-von-Suttner-Str. 9
D-37085 Göttingen

Tel: +49 551 29176100
Fax: +49 551 29176105

http://www.intranda.com
<email address hidden>

Geschäftsführer: M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Göttingen, HRB 201125
Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE269573794
___________________________________________________

Robert Sehr (robert-sehr) wrote :

Er baut aber damit das "clonen" von templates aus

Am 19.04.2012 13:30, schrieb Steffen Hankiewicz:
> Finde ich sinnvoll. War allerdings damals explizit so vom GDZ gefordert.
> Die Ansicht in der Navigation ist im Übrigen unterschiedlich für
> verschiedene Nutzer und abhängig von der Anzahl der Vorgangsvorlagen.
>
> Ansonsten: I like :)
>

--
_________________________________________________

M.Sc. Inf. Robert Sehr
Softwareentwickler

intranda GmbH
Bertha-von-Suttner-Str. 9
D-37085 Göttingen

Tel: +49 551 29176100
Fax: +49 551 29176105

http://www.intranda.com
<email address hidden>

Geschäftsführer: M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Göttingen, HRB 201125
Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE269573794

_________________________________________________

stimmt. Das ist in der Tat nicht sinnvoll. Die Checkbox zum umschalten
muss definitiv erhalten bleiben. Sie wird häufig benötigt.

--
___________________________________________________

M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Software-Entwicklung, Leitung

intranda GmbH
Bertha-von-Suttner-Str. 9
D-37085 Göttingen

Tel: +49 551 29176100
Fax: +49 551 29176105

http://www.intranda.com
<email address hidden>

Geschäftsführer: M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Göttingen, HRB 201125
Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE269573794
___________________________________________________

achso, den Fortschrittsbalken würde ich ebenfalls nicht bei den
Templates entfernen wollen. Der ist schon sehr aussagekräftig in vielen
Situationen.

--
___________________________________________________

M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Software-Entwicklung, Leitung

intranda GmbH
Bertha-von-Suttner-Str. 9
D-37085 Göttingen

Tel: +49 551 29176100
Fax: +49 551 29176105

http://www.intranda.com
<email address hidden>

Geschäftsführer: M.A. soz. Steffen Hankiewicz
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Göttingen, HRB 201125
Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE269573794
___________________________________________________

Which steps have to be taken in the current system to copy a template?

If such a feature is needed, it should be made explicit. Imho, the check-box inveigles to faulty operation.

And, in which constellation is there a progress within a template? Can you give us an example?

summary: - Amorphous user guidance for creation of new process templates / new
+ Inconsistent user guidance for creation of new process templates / new
processes

Apart from generation of a useless project template, this seems to be an GUI design issue only. Is there an actual problem related to this? Template cloning should be an explicit feature though.

However, I agree to proposed steps. It's clearly an improvement.

Matthias Ronge (matthias-ronge) wrote :

I stumbled across it during documenting: There were different dialogs having the same caption − how to tell them apart‽ When taking a close look I became clear that there is some more mess around here to be straightened. Being beyond words definitely is a usability issue and should be addressed in order to improve acceptance. Having the possibility to create useless processes is a bug.

This 'UI clutter' stems from the fact, that processes and process templates are basically the same concept, applied in different contexts. Therefore processes can be have progress *and* serve as templates.

--Proposal--
We might consider to smooth this out a little bit by making templates first class citizens different from processes, instead of just allow to use process as templates. This might address issues with changing templates and propagating changes to processes. However, doing bulk changes is a risky concept.

--Decision--
1- Fixing the bug and remove UI clutter, but keep the concept.
2- Rethink the process management approach: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/goobi-production/+spec/revise-process-management

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers