(FR) Better support for aspect-driven reviews

[Daniel Kulesz]

It seems to me, that RevAger has been designed to support "classic" reviews of documents, where the document is inspected linear (i.e. chapter by chapter), but not following the decided aspects.

In case of an aspect-driven review, there are several problems in the current 1.2rc (r19) version:
- the scribe has to select the same aspect for each finding manually, while the reviewers do not leave this aspect.
- the scribe has to manually select the current aspect and enter a new finding "Good" for each aspect, for which the reviewers do not report any findings. If several aspects remain empty, the whole review team sits there and waits for the scribe to just fill this information.
- in our today's live sessions, I was able to spot two general usability / understanding problems related to this:
   a) one scribe totally misunderstood the program's concept and already pre-entered several findings and associated each finding with an aspect, so he arrived in the review meeting with a previously saved review session which had already 16 findings (we had 16 aspects).
   b) another scribe used the "reference" field for referencing the aspect. He entered several "real" findings into one "Revager finding" separated by CR/LF. In this case, the review team decided on a common severity for a couple of findings, which is quite suboptimal for a later issue tracker export.

I think to really address these issues, we would need to think about a major concept change, i.e. offering a "aspect-driven" and a "document-driven / linear" scribe mode.

Please feel free to submit prototypes for a possible realization of this issue.

[Holger Röder (roederhr)]

Great idea! (Guess we talked about this before. ;) ) This would also allow using RevAger as a 'checklist tool'.