Skip to content
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

Feature request: Radio buttons for new Equivalence column #130

Open
quinntd opened this issue Apr 14, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Feature request: Radio buttons for new Equivalence column #130

quinntd opened this issue Apr 14, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@quinntd
Copy link

quinntd commented Apr 14, 2021

This is a request for a usability enhancement.

The new "Equivalence" column is a welcome addition to Usagi. Previously, we were using an awkward documentation convention in the "Comment" column for exactly this information. This new enumerated list of values is MUCH better!

However, we are finding the drop-down box at the bottom of the screen to be cumbersome. I propose turning it into a set of radio buttons (one for each choice, arranged horizontally) and locating it in the center of the Usagi screen, above the search results pane.

I think the "Flag" and "Approve" buttons, along with the "Comment" text field, should also be located above the search results pane to minimize mouse-pointer movements.

Every little efficiency gain adds up when you're mapping thousands of concepts.

@MaximMoinat
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for your feedback! I think radio buttons will make a very cluttered view, and potentially increase mouse-pointer movements (long horizontal row).

The reason the approve is at the bottom, is for the flow of the application. First you select a code at the top, then use the middle search to find the right target and lastly approve at the bottom. In case there is no target concept to change, you can simply press alt-a to approve. We might add specific shortkeys for approving with an equivalence status (e.g. alt-a-e for equal).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants