Closed Bug 218568 Opened 22 years ago Closed 22 years ago

Clean up charting UI

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Reporting/Charting, defect, P1)

2.17.4
defect

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.18

People

(Reporter: gerv, Assigned: gerv)

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 4 obsolete files)

Having played with the new charts, there are a couple of tweaks I'd like to make to them to simplify the UI. Gerv
Attached patch Patch v.1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This patch: - Rearranges the two sections on the form for defining a chart to plot - Makes various clarifying wording changes - Adds a "this is in beta" disclaimer (the only change in the big rearranged block) - Explains how Subscriptions work Gerv
Comment on attachment 131031 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.1 Dave, You reviewed bug 16009 originally - could you look at this? Nothing controversial here. Gerv
Attachment #131031 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Attachment #131031 - Flags: review?(justdave) → review?(kiko)
Comment on attachment 131031 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.1 Rats. I thought I'd got this in for 2.17.6 - it's the patch which marks the charting system as a beta. <sigh>. Never mind - Dave, could you review this? Gerv
Attachment #131031 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Comment on attachment 131031 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.1 >+Administrators may mark data sets as public, so they show up in everyone's list. All others are not public, and you have to explicitly subscribe to them in order There a reason this line wraps so wide? Everything else looks good from a review of the code. Haven't had a chance to test it yet though.
Comment on attachment 131031 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.1 Overall, the change looks okay. It would be nice to be able to see the changes in a rendered page, but I won't hold your review for that (but I will nitpick later if I don't like it <wink>) There are a couple of questions below, take them into account if you feel they are relevant. I would consider it okay to move on my r+ to a newer patch, and request approval on that (I might take a glance at it if I have a minute). >Index: template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl,v >retrieving revision 1.1 >diff -u -r1.1 create-chart.html.tmpl >--- template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl 25 Jun 2003 23:23:02 -0000 1.1 >+++ template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl 7 Sep 2003 16:11:07 -0000 >@@ -59,17 +59,93 @@ > > [% gttext = "Grand Total" %] > >-<h3>Current Data Sets:</h3> >+<form method="get" action="chart.cgi" name="chartform"> This section was moved up, but its <h3> was not preserved (it used to be Select Data Sets) -- intentional? >+ <font color="red"> >+ Note: this new charting system is in beta. This means that retention of >+ data or defined data sets is on a best-efforts basis only, and cannot be >+ guaranteed. Please file any bugs you find or enhancement ideas you think >+ of. >+ </font> I really can't appreciate the use of <font>, can't we change that so <span color="red">? And do you feel this *needs* to be red? >+ <i>You do not have permissions to see any data sets, or none >+ exist.</i> Perhaps make this nicer: There are currently no visible data sets. or maybe: No data sets exist, or none are visible to you. (but I consider messages with "or"s in them bad UI) >+ <noscript> >+ <td> >+ <input type="submit" name="action-assemble" value="Update -->"> Shouldn't that be &gt;? >+ <noscript> >+ <td> >+ <input type="submit" name="action-assemble" value="Update -->"> Again. >+ <td align="left"> >+ <label for="name" accesskey="N"> >+ <select name="name" id="name" style="width: 15em" >+ size="5" multiple="multiple" >+ [% FOREACH x = name.keys.sort %] >+ <option value="[% name.$x FILTER html %]" >+ [%# " selected" IF lsearch(default.name, x) != -1 %]> Why is this line commented out? It was originally commented out, but I'm more curious at to the use of this "default" creature, which is created for action 'view' in chart.cgi but never used. (It also makes me wonder why this template is called create-chart when the sub is called view) If it's broken, at least mark it with an XXX? + <td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;"> Why are we using style for this table cell but not for most of the others? valign="middle" should work, no? >+ <script> >+ document.chartform.category[0].selected = true; >+ catSelected(); >+ subcatSelected(); >+ </script> I see you're using plain <script> in the charting templates, make sure this is intentional (the rest of bugzilla uses type and language a bit inconsistently) > [% IF series.creator != 0 %] > [% IF series.subscribed %] This line is stale (it changed to isSubscribed), but what I am really pushing for here is that this should *REALLY* be a n && clause, since you do [% END %] [% ELSE %] below. >+<p> >+Administrators may mark data sets as public, so they show up in everyone's list. All others are not public, and you maybe s/so/which/ have to explicitly subscribe to them in order perhaps s/have to/must/ >Index: template/en/default/reports/edit-series.html.tmpl >+ <b>Creator</b>: >+ [% IF creator.email %] >+ <a href="mailto:[% creator.email FILTER html %]"> >+ [% creator.email FILTER html %]</a> >+ [% ELSE %] >+ None (automatically created by [% terms.Bugzilla %]) This None echoes a bit awkward, so consider if we could drop it and just leave the parenthesized explanation. template/en/default/search/search-create-series.html.tmpl >-[% button_name = "I'm Feeling Buggy" %] >+[% button_name = "Create / Search" %] A button labelled "Create / Search" is really going to confuse me when I look at that page rendered (though the original isn't much better :) Thanks!
Attachment #131031 - Flags: review?(kiko) → review+
> This section was moved up, but its <h3> was not preserved (it used to be Select > Data Sets) -- intentional? Yes. :-) > (It also makes me wonder why this template is called create-chart when the sub > is called view) It's called create-chart rather than create because there are several sorts of report in the "reports" template directory. It's create rather than view because a create() sub would imply it created something, which it doesn't really. Perhaps it's confusing, but it's a bit late now. :-| > A button labelled "Create / Search" is really going to confuse me when I look > at that page rendered (though the original isn't much better :) The problem is that what the page does depends on the radio button below. I think people will want to try out searches to make sure they have the right one, then flip the radio to "create" and create it. Gerv
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attached patch Patch v.2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This patch fixes all review comments. Gerv
Attachment #131031 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #136251 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Requesting approval; kiko said his review carried, although I've marked it again in case he wants to have another look (see top of comment 5). Gerv
Flags: approval+
errr... ?
Flags: approval+ → approval?
Oops - sorry. Misset the flag :-) Gerv
I'll try and take a look at this, but here's something I thought up: >> A button labelled "Create / Search" is really going to confuse me when I look >> at that page rendered (though the original isn't much better :) > > The problem is that what the page does depends on the radio button below. I > think people will want to try out searches to make sure they have the right one, > then flip the radio to "create" and create it. Would it be possible to use two submit buttons instead of radiobutton + Create/Search button? That would be cleaner, I think. Could you post an HTML dump of the page somewhere so I can take a look?
> + [%# " selected" IF lsearch(default.name, x) != -1 %]> Did you miss this part of my review, or is this part intentional? Also, there are some extra bits in series-common and chart.cgi, are they supposed to be in here too?
there's open questions from kiko still...
Flags: approval?
Attached patch Patch v.3 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This addresses kiko's points - we now have two buttons, and that commented-out line has been removed. The new code is intentional, yes :-) HTML dumps are available here: http://www.gerv.net/temp/query.cgi.html http://www.gerv.net/temp/chart.cgi.html (Images may not work.) Gerv
Attachment #136251 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #131031 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Attachment #136251 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Attachment #136479 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Priority: -- → P1
Comment on attachment 136479 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.3 I guess I should review this or else you'll keep adding surprise bits to this patch overnight :-) I have some comments on the general UI: chart.cgi.html: - I think we're missing an "Add Data Set" heading for the top part (I had to figure that out by myself <wink>). Maybe the correct approach is to place the add data set bits *under* the list of data sets. - The Add to List button should probably be top-valigned - It would be *really* nice if the Date Range entries had a colspan of 2 to make it render nicely in a narrow window -- my browser windows are usually 700px and you get linebreaks there. - I don't particularly like the 2px border around the Data Sets controls -- the header already separates them from the controls above. Perhaps indenting the controls under the header would be an idea. - It isn't very clear that Sum/Remove are relative to the sets in the list. I would suggest displaying them horizontally aligned, and then using a horizontal separator or spacing to group the "chart this list" controls. - It's unclear what cumulate does, but I'm not sure how to make that clearer. query.cgi.html - The horizontal rule to separate the data sets is redundant, and should go. - The New (add below) select control should be the last one. It makes understanding the textboxes under it a whole lot easier if they are grayed out by default (when at least one set exists) and only editable when the user intentionally makes a selection on the New item. Bonus points for a focus shift to the input entry when selecting the new item! - Should the Run Search button be separated from the form controls and perhaps prefixed with a label to the effect of "(To see the bugs that would currently be a part of this data set, (( Run this Search ))"? I think the or is just confusing there, since the real task at hand is creating new data sets. Or at least that's how I read the UI :-) I'm unsure as to how to handle this review-wise. On one hand I would like your changes to go in ASAP; OTOH this bug's summary allows for this sort of suggestion. The code in the patch looks fine to me, save a few comments above that reflect on it. What do you think?
> chart.cgi.html: > - I think we're missing an "Add Data Set" heading for the top part This would lead to one heading directly under another, which would look odd. > Maybe the correct approach is to place the add data set bits *under* the list > of data sets. The original implementation had this; however, it made the page less stable because the Add To List section kept moving further and further down. > - The Add to List button should probably be top-valigned Any particular reason? It seems OK to me in the middle. > - It would be *really* nice if the Date Range entries had a colspan of 2 Your wish is my command. > - It isn't very clear that Sum/Remove are relative to the sets in the list. I > would suggest displaying them horizontally aligned, and then using a > horizontal separator or spacing to group the "chart this list" controls. I'm not quite sure what you mean here; but "Chart This List" ignores the checkboxes, so I wouldn't want to put Sum and Remove near that button. > query.cgi.html > - Should the Run Search button be separated from the form controls and > perhaps prefixed with a label to the effect of See what you think of the new positioning. It has the unfortunate side-effect of making it the default button, but I think it's no win the right place. All other comments addressed as requested. "Screenshots" updated. Gerv
Attached patch Patch v.4 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #136479 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #136629 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Attachment #136479 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Attachment #136629 - Attachment description: Patch v.3 → Patch v.4
More comments: Create Data Set: - Shouldn't the boolean chart come *before* the data set controls? - How about having Run every X day(s) and Visible to all laid out horizontally under the select controls to make the page width more or less nicely consistent? Create Chart: - Sum/Remove confuse me still. Are they Add/Remove? Sum/Subtract? - I still think the Add to List button could use a position tweak; we could try under the select boxes (to indicate it applies to all of them), or top-aligning (you didn't like that though). I'll take a good look at the code now.
Comment on attachment 136629 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v.4 As a note, it would be cool if you could use an HTML checker on the pages generated to try and pick up errors left over.. >Index: template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl >+ <th>Name:</th> [snip] >+ <td align="left"> >+ <label for="name" accesskey="N"> Should this label be around the Name: above, or is this the right way to do what you want here? >+ <table cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2"> > <tr> > <th>Select</th> >- <th>As</th> >+ <th>Label</th> > <th></th> > <th>Data Set</th> >- <th>Subs</th> >+ <th>Subs (<a href="#subs">?</a>)</th> The Subs header and the link don't do much for me; Subs is just confusing, and the link will usually do only a partial scroll of the page (since the help text is at the bottom). This is an opinion/nit, feel free to ignore. >Index: template/en/default/reports/series-common.html.tmpl >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/series-common.html.tmpl,v >retrieving revision 1.1 >diff -u -r1.1 series-common.html.tmpl >--- template/en/default/reports/series-common.html.tmpl 25 Jun 2003 23:23:01 -0000 1.1 >+++ template/en/default/reports/series-common.html.tmpl 1 Dec 2003 23:06:52 -0000 >@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ > } > > [% IF newtext %] >- subcatwidget.options[i] = new Option("[% newtext FILTER js %]", ""); >+ subcatwidget.options[i++] = new Option("[% newtext FILTER js %]", ""); > [% END %] Hmmm, I don't see much the point of this change, since i is a local variable and doesn't seem to be used after this statement, but I may be just confused. >Index: template/en/default/reports/series.html.tmpl > > <script> >+ document.chartform.category[0].selected = true; >+ catSelected(); > checkNewState(); > </script> This won't validate, script wants a type and language. These are just nits and you can take what you will, you've got r=kiko.
Attachment #136629 - Flags: review?(kiko) → review+
> Should this label be around the Name: above, or is this the right way to do > what you want here? Doesn't make too much odds; putting it around the actual label makes it clickable, but that's not necessarily useful here. > The Subs header and the link don't do much for me Link removed. > Hmmm, I don't see much the point of this change, since i is a local variable Remnant of aborted code change. Reversed. > This won't validate, script wants a type and language. Fixed. Gerv
Attached patch Patch v.5Splinter Review
This is the patch for checkin, just for the record. Gerv
Attachment #136629 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Flags: approval?
Attachment #136753 - Flags: review+
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
Flags: approval? → approval+
Fixed. Checking in template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl,v <-- create-chart.html.tmpl new revision: 1.3; previous revision: 1.2 done Checking in template/en/default/reports/edit-series.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/edit-series.html.tmpl,v <-- edit-series.html.tmpl new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1 done Checking in template/en/default/reports/series.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/series.html.tmpl,v <-- series.html.tmpl new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1 done Checking in template/en/default/search/search-create-series.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/search/search-create-series.html.tmpl,v <-- search-create-series.html.tmpl new revision: 1.3; previous revision: 1.2 done Checking in template/en/default/search/form.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/search/form.html.tmpl,v <-- form.html.tmpl new revision: 1.21; previous revision: 1.20 done Gerv
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
The tree is red due to this as well. Words "bugs" must be templatized in templates.
Bustage fixed. Checking in template/en/default/search/search-create-series.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/search/search-create-series.html.tmpl,v <-- search-create-series.html.tmpl new revision: 1.4; previous revision: 1.3 done Checking in template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/reports/create-chart.html.tmpl,v <-- create-chart.html.tmpl new revision: 1.4; previous revision: 1.3 done Gerv
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: