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

Application Form tags representation UX improvement #1410

Closed
ibolton336 opened this issue Sep 28, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1427
Closed

Application Form tags representation UX improvement #1410

ibolton336 opened this issue Sep 28, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1427
Assignees
Labels
Custom Assessment Items relating to custom assessment work
Milestone

Comments

@ibolton336
Copy link
Member

ibolton336 commented Sep 28, 2023

  • Currently, the application form allows selection of tags from all available tags from the tags api. This could potentially result in a duplicate tag existing on an application if the user manually adds a tag that was already applied to an application via another source (analysis, assessment, or archetype membership).

There is some room to improve this UX by potentially:

  • Displaying existing tag relationships in the application edit form
  • Hiding already associated tags from the selections options for application tags
@ibolton336 ibolton336 converted this from a draft issue Sep 28, 2023
@ibolton336 ibolton336 added this to the 0.3-beta.1 milestone Sep 28, 2023
@ibolton336 ibolton336 added the Custom Assessment Items relating to custom assessment work label Sep 28, 2023
@ibolton336
Copy link
Member Author

ibolton336 commented Sep 28, 2023

Implementation suggestions and further description of the problem here: #1403 (comment)

@ibolton336 ibolton336 moved this from 🔖 Ready to 🏗 In progress in Planning Sep 28, 2023
@sjd78
Copy link
Member

sjd78 commented Sep 28, 2023

PR #1408 enables making these kinds of changes. Disallowing the selection of tags that have already been selected by another source (analysis, application assessment, archetype, archetype assessment) should be a matter of filtering the source options list.

UX design for showing the non-manual Tags (i.e. TagRef with a non-empty source) would be helpful.

@sjd78
Copy link
Member

sjd78 commented Oct 3, 2023

After following up with Ramon and Justin --

  • The application form will show only manual tags (i.e. source = "")

  • The manual tag list will present all tags since having the same tag from multiple sources can be good information in an of itself

  • The label on the tag list will be changed to "Manual Tag(s)" to match the view in the application drawer

sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2023
Resolves: konveyor#1410
Follows up: konveyor#1408

  - The application form will only show manual tags (i.e. source="")

  - All tags are allowable for selection as a manual tag

  - Change the label on the field from "Tags" to "Manual Tags" to
    match the "Manual" grouping of tags in the application drawer

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <sdickers@redhat.com>
@sjd78 sjd78 added this to Konveyor UI Oct 3, 2023
@sjd78 sjd78 moved this to In Progress in Konveyor UI Oct 3, 2023
ibolton336 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2023
Resolves: #1410
Follows up: #1408

  - The application form will only show manual tags (i.e. source="")

  - All tags are allowable for selection as a manual tag

- Change the label on the field from "Tags" to "Manual Tags" to match
the "Manual" grouping of tags in the application drawer

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <sdickers@redhat.com>
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🏗 In progress to ✅ Done in Planning Oct 3, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Done in Konveyor UI Oct 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Custom Assessment Items relating to custom assessment work
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants