UI meeting 5 (4th July)
From LimeSurvey Manual
- Regardless of implementation, concept separation is useful from UI point of view
- Implementation-wise, 1 table 'user' will be used
- Either use an additional 'type' column to distinguish, or make use of Security Groups
- Make sure administrators can also participate (can be tricky, if we use second option from above point)
Terminilogy note: When speaking of Surveys and Questionnaires, they always mean the dictionary definition. Concepts used in LS2 are prepended with "ls2:" to avoid confusion. As an example, what we refer to Questionnaires in real world, is actually called Survey in LS2.
- Questionnaire = a form/set of questions
- Survey = act of collecting information using Questionnaire(s) and obtaining results
- Current LS2 implementation names these concepts differently, we should decide once and for all how are we going to call these in our code!
- Results should be bound to the Survey, not the Questionnaire!
- Current implementation uses 'result_x' tables, where x is the id of the corresponding ls2:Survey. This is not a problem, as another column called 'assignment_id' is used to separate responses coming from differnt Surveys/ls2:Assignments. Just make sure that this column is never NULL.
- Video preview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGk9k9XqlJ4
Conditions, Conditions Builder, Invitations and Dashboard.
[15:03] holch: good morning.
[15:05] macduy: hi
holch: Ahh, here you are...
holch: Thought I might be almost alone like last time.
holch: How are things going?
holch: Thanks for the feedback, only just saw it now.
[15:06] macduy: things are fine, hope you too!
holch: One question: did you receive my email to the email list?
holch: Yup. Tired but fine.
macduy: 'tired' is appropriate :P
macduy: which e-mail?
holch: So it didn't work again?
[15:07] macduy: I received one from last week
holch: It was a reminder for todays meeting and I was hinting to give some feedback...
holch: Last week?
holch: I didn't write an email to the email list last week. At least it didn't work.
macduy: oh sorry, no I did receive a reminder 2 days ago
[15:08] macduy: we can still get some direct feedback now
holch: Ahh, OK.
macduy: let's see who's here
macduy: Hi Jon, Amit, Josef :)
[15:09] jwestfall: Hello!
holch: So at least I know that it is working, because I didn't receive it,and there was no response, so I was not sure.
holch: Who is Josef? El-Matador?
holch: Good to know.
[15:10] jwestfall: Yea, sorry about not replying - busy week. Email is working though :)
macduy: let's get started:
holch: That is fine, you are here and you can reply now... ;-)
[15:11] holch: Yup. I am ready.
amit8-88: Hi guys
holch: This time I can't stay that long, have a meeting at 12:00.
holch: Hi Amit.
macduy: holch, is that in 2 hours time?
macduy: Hi Amit
amit8-88: hi macduy, holch
[15:12] holch: Yup.
holch: But of course I would have to leave 30min before.
holch: More or less.
macduy: no worries, we'll keep it 1 hour long today
macduy: topic #1: User/Participant holch: any feedback from the developers? [15:13] macduy: yep, there is general agreement of participants having varying levels of rights and anonymity inside the LS2 hierarchy holch: But they are part of "users", right? macduy: yes, we refer to them all as users amit8-88: yeah [15:14] holch: OK. macduy: the devs got hooked on a discussion about customizable attributes, so we'll see where that leads ;) holch: For the UI I would separate this a little more clearly though. macduy: yes, from UI point of view I think we envision a list of users and then a 'pool' of participants [15:15] macduy: to select from. From these people, we usually just retain minimum info, e.g. their e-mail address. holch: With participants being a special sort of users, who can only fill in data, etc. macduy: yep holch: Fine with me. Anything else. macduy: nope jwestfall: It would be nice though if the UI allowed admins to be 'participants' in some scenarios jwestfall: perhaps some sort of filtering in the UI that by default doesn't show them holch: What about the wording? Will Participants be called "participants"? [15:16] jwestfall: but could be toggled off so all users show up as pools macduy: I would definitely keep the word Participant macduy: there will be jwestfall: Yea, Participant is preferable to "subject" or respondant holch: I vote for Participants two. It is clear, everyone should understand immediately what a "participant" is. macduy: yep, definitely [15:17] holch: Yes, sometimes "subject" is used. I find it horrible... amit8-88: yep macduy: I imagine it will be something like "Choose your participants" amit8-88: participant is better :) jwestfall: Yea, there is a huge debate amid some psychologists over the "participant" vs. "subject" thing holch: OK. We fixed that. macduy: anything else on this matter?
[15:18] macduy: ok, topic #2: Survey/Questionnaire holch: Let psychologists discuss that. We choose the friendly version... ;-) holch: OK. holch: That might be more tricky, right? macduy: yep, as usual :P holch: I vote for separtating those two concepts, as you all know. holch: separating. macduy: in current LS2 implementation referred to Assignment/Survey [15:19] holch: seperating... holch: Now I got it. macduy: although I agree that Questionnaire makes much more sense in terms of naming holch: I think my "survey" concept is more ample than assignments. holch: You will store or the principal information about the project in Survey. [15:20] macduy: Yes, a Questionnaire is just a set/form of questions holch: There you will choose the group of participants, invite them, choose a questionnaire, choose a template, etc. macduy: exactly jwestfall: I vote for seperating the two as well macduy: please burn this into your minds :P holch: It would give you a lot of flexibility. [15:21] holch: What should we burn in our minds? jwestfall: especially if it could be designed to allow multiple questionnaires in 1 survey macduy: well, this separation concept ;) holch: I have it in my had. Question is: do the developers? ;-) macduy: (I was directing that more towards them ;) ) [15:22] macduy: I have only one issue: holch: So the "questionnaire section" is pure for creating document with different questions. holch: Go on: macduy: as Mazi pointed out earlier, "Survey" as a term is stuck holch: Yes. holch: And we won't loose it. macduy: there are meny parts named like that in the code, that depend on it [15:23] holch: This means that the have coded survey in actual "questionnaire" parts? macduy: no, we have named everything, that in your book is called "questionnaire", a "survey" macduy: so purely a naming mishap holch: Well, how the developers call it, shouldn't be a major problem for the UI. Or are they visible in the html source code? [15:24] macduy: I think so macduy: it would be confusing even for us holch: Because to be honest, the average user will never go into the PHP code. And if he does, we can expect that he tries to understand it. macduy: because what the devs call a Survey is suddenly the UI people's name for an Assignment :) [15:25] holch: For theme development, this is something else. There it could be a little weired. holch: OK. holch: I see. macduy: so I would suggest we go for Survey Project/Survey holch: Well, it is not ideal, I have to admit. macduy: so do I macduy: but I think the term 'project' should work out well [15:26] macduy: people will immediately think - 'ah project, something big. It also involves a survey' holch: But, as it is separated from UI and developers and users this should be possible to overcome. macduy: it should be, but developers also write documentation for other developers to read holch: I like Survey Project, because it actually is a small "project management" section, what "survey" is. [15:27] macduy: Survey Project is majorly just a binder, that connects a questionnaire, bunch of people and a set of results holch: And there is no chance to "search & replace", right? :-) jwestfall: Well, survey/questionnaire is technically correct as per research methodology, however I agree that project/survey should be intuitive enough as a replacement. macduy: I understand that pedantically we are using the wrong terms [15:28] holch: Ah, now I get what you want. You want to get rid of questionnaire. holch: Hmm. macduy: I want to replace the term ;) holch: OK. holch: I didn't get that. holch: I thought you wanted to rename "survey" to "survey project". macduy: your concept is completely sound [15:29] macduy: hehe ok, to sum my point: macduy: In Real Worl: macduy: - Questionnaire = "A form/set of questions" macduy: - Survey = "A conduct of acquiring responses through a questionnaire" macduy: In LS2 World: macduy: - "Survey" = "A form/set of Questions" [15:30] macduy: - "Survey Project" = "A conduct of acquiring responses through the above" holch: Well, I would still use questionnaire and survey, but I guess we will have to compromise, somehow. macduy: I think we have to compromise holch: But the seperation wouldn't be that nice. macduy: I'll see if I get this discussion going again in the dev channel macduy: the separation would be exactly the same macduy: we just called it different things :P holch: You would have one or two surveys in a survey project. [15:31] macduy: true, it sounds a bit lame macduy: but let's stick to this for now holch: Look, I am the advocate what I think would be ideal. However, I understand that there are more stakeholders to LS2 than just the plain "user". [15:32] macduy: it really depends on what people imagine under the word "survey" holch: So if the developers require the questionnaires to be called "survey", I will have to live with it. ;-) macduy: e.g. to me, it could equally mean both the form with questions as well as the whole process. [15:33] holch: Yes, if there would be ONLY survey, I agree. but I am not sure how "survey" will work together with "survey project" macduy: if I were met with a program where the terms used were "survey" and "survey project" I would be happy to accept that by "survey" they probably mean the piece of paper ;) holch: Well, at the end of the day the users will accept anything. [15:34] holch: LS is free, they can't really complain... ;-) macduy: hehe, or move to a different app holch: Though they still might do. Mazi probably can tell some stories. holch: Well, there isn't really an alternative. macduy: he's away today, but we can ask him later [15:35] holch: Does anyone have news about the MITRE project? Should have been released a while ago. macduy: so for now, let's keep both Survey/Questionnaire and Survey Project/Survey terminology options in mind amit8-88: nope. I guess they still into it holch: I thought they were supposed to finalize it until Christmas last year? Thats what they told me. [15:36] jwestfall: Perhaps just "project / survey" would be better than "survey project" for users. Avoiding reuse of the word "survey" may be confusing. macduy: good point holch: Hmmm. I think it is getting worse. jwestfall: err... avoiding reuse may be LESS confusing holch: I can see your point, Jon. [15:37] holch: But then, they may ask them self "what the hell do I need a project for, when I have the survey section?" amit8-88: well I will still go with Survey/ Questionnaire :) holch: Amit is my man! Hahahaha. amit8-88: :) [15:38] macduy: what about Poll? jwestfall: Yea, that's possible - although the UI could give 'hints' to clarify things for users holch: Well, I guess we all agree that the ideal version (for now, maybe we find something even better?) would be questionnaire / survey. jwestfall: "Survey" (below, smaller type) "reusable set of questions" holch: But it seems like we will need to compromise here, due to the fact that we have started rather late with the UI meeting. jwestfall: "Project" (below, etc..) "one or more surveys given to participants" [15:39] macduy: maybe we should do a survey into this ;) jwestfall: Yea, questionnaire/survey would be great if devs can change to accomodate it holch: don't like poll. jwestfall: nobody likes poll holch: On the net more used for single questions [15:40] amit8-88: yeah they are majorly for single views macduy: yeah, but i mean use of LS to create polls holch: Well, a poll would be a single question questionnaire (or survey). macduy: where does that leave us if a user wants to create a poll, he would be creating a "Survey" with a "Questionnaire" containing 1 question holch: We don't need something special for it, do we? [15:41] macduy: nope holch: OK. macduy: ok, it's getting a bit muddled here jwestfall: Yea, but I don't think we should care - if someone uses LS2 for a one question poll, they are engaging in a huge amount of overkill holch: But this survey / questionnaire / survey project thing is already getting confusing here. macduy: maybe there can be a wizard that takes care of that, but let's leave that for future [15:42] macduy: as I say, I agree with survey/questionnaire macduy: as a concept macduy: and also with the naming holch: Well. what we need now is... holch: to fix something I think. jwestfall: Yea, right now to summarize, I think we'd all be happy if survey/questionnaire could be used as a concept and name, however if the devs demand it, we may have to go with survey project / survey holch: we shouldn't go on for two long with two different concepts. [15:43] macduy: to make sure: I'm just arguing about the terms here :) macduy: because I'm not sure how well the devs and seasoned LS1.x users will accept these holch: Good. Now it is up to the devolpers, if they think they can do this for the sake of the final user, or if it would complicate there work too much. macduy: but if we are not met with resistance, Survey/Questionnaire will get passed. jwestfall: at least we all agree on the concept! [15:44] holch: If it would be a payed project I would tell them to just accept it. But here we are talking about delevopers spending their spare time on this project. amit8-88: I guess Survey/Questionnaire should pass ;) macduy: we'll see ;) macduy: ok, let's forget naming now holch: Fingers crossed. macduy: to the concept: holch: next point on agenda? macduy: does that mean that results would be bound to a "Survey" rather than the "Questionnaire"? holch: Of course! [15:45] holch: questionnaire could have been created 5 years ago. holch: Of course somehow the questionnaire is also bound to the survey and the results. macduy: yep, but in simple relation diagrams holch: But it is basically only the form to get the results in the database. macduy: + conditions and other attributes directly related to the questionnaire [15:46] holch: Yes. holch: Because they could also be reusable. macduy: but things like questionnaire theme, publicity, anonymity, that should part of "Survey" holch: If someone needs different conditions, he needs a different questionnaire. macduy: yeah holch: Exactly. macduy: ok [15:47] macduy: that is pretty much taken care of by the current survey/assignment system holch: It would be ideal to be able to assign a different theme for each questionnaire in different surveys. macduy: yep macduy: so, to devs: holch: Because for example I have some multi-client projects, which are almost all run the same questionnaire, but different layouts (adapted to the CI). [15:48] macduy: CI? holch: Corporate Identity. macduy: ah I see macduy: yep holch: It is actually more the CD. holch: corporate design. holch: But every brand has different rules. holch: Logo top left, bottom right, whatever. [15:49] macduy: that can be tricky holch: Why? macduy: well, markup-wise macduy: our Survey Engine is being rewritten so we can address this issue holch: With the template system shouldn't be a problem? holch: It isn't now... macduy: nah, should not be macduy: forget what I wrote ;) [15:50] holch: However, what I would need could be overcome by simply copying a survey. holch: Not as slick, but also possible. macduy: also, can we decide on some notation please? holch: Notation?
- End matters
macduy: when we speak of Survey and Questionnaire, they mean what holch means macduy: or *write rather holch: ahh. [15:51] macduy: when I write ls2:Survey and ls2:Assignment, I mean what they mean in the current LS2 codebase macduy: to avoid confusion ;) holch: Good idea. ;-) For the minutes of the meeting. macduy: any other thoughts on LS2? jwestfall: yea, makes sense [15:52] macduy: *on Survey/Questionnaire holch: Where would we locate the templating system? holch: In "Questionnaires" or in "Surveys" or in its own section? macduy: hmm, that might involve writing your own code macduy: which means it might not be part of the visible UI holch: The creation and adinistration I mean. [15:53] holch: Thea assigning would have to be in "Survey". macduy: yes holch: OK, so there won't be an user interface for templates/themes, like in 1.8? [15:54] macduy: oh, maybe there should be then macduy: would probably be part of a "Later" category, holch: Honestly, I wouldn't need it. Have never used this part. External coding for themes should be fine. [15:55] macduy: ok. topic #2 closed holch: But some users with less experience in HTML, CSS and PHP would probably like the current approach. holch: OK. jwestfall: It's nice to have an editor for quick HTML changes holch: Jon, I agree. jwestfall: I'd vote to have it there in some capacity, doesn't have to be very robust macduy: well, we could develop something like the Blogspot's theming thing amit8-88: yeah but as macduy says it would be in later category macduy: we could really go a long way on that one, so let's just leave it for later [15:56] holch: That should be fine. jwestfall: OK [15:57] macduy: in other news: I'd like to post a preview of the LS2 dashboard to youtube on Monday holch: Cool. Any preview for us? macduy: any comments and suggestions would be welcome! amit8-88: nice!! macduy: holch: you mean a hands-on one? [15:58] holch: Anything. Screenshots, hands-on, whatever you have. holch: You have mentioned that you have different colour versions, right? holch: Dark and bright. macduy: I'll post the video on Monday and send links to the maillist holch: OK. macduy: holch: yes, but I'm currently working with dark only holch: OK. [15:59] macduy: alright then, shall we call it a day? [16:00] holch: If from your side there isn't anything else? holch: What will we have to discuss next week? macduy: good point holch: I might be not able to attend, but this is still unclear. amit8-88: maybe you can have some views on the conditions editor [16:01] holch: Have some client from the US over here for the whole week and I might have to entertain them on Saturday... ;-) macduy: invite them to the meeting :P amit8-88: lol macduy: Condition builder definitely holch: Nah, better not. holch: Condition builder. right. I promissed to have a look at this too. [16:02] jwestfall: Next week is dhardisty's week to attend, but if Condition builder is up, we both might be here ;) holch: Might be difficult this week though. Have interviews scheduled from Tuesday till Friday from around 8am till 9pm. [16:03] macduy: and Invitations holch: Maybe I can have look on it on sunday, but still have to translate guidelines. So, let's see. holch: I will try to give some feedback at least. holch: Yes, invitations is a interesting part. amit8-88: sure no problem holch: So, that's it then? macduy: so, next week: Conditions, Invitations and Dashboard-related stuff, if we have time [16:04] holch: Good. amit8-88: cool!! macduy: thanks everyone for attending! We kept it to 1 hour today :) amit8-88: hehe jwestfall: Bye ;) [16:05] macduy: everybody have a great weekend! holch: By, have a good weekend all! holch: off. macduy: Cyall amit8-88: bye!! amit8-88: have nice day