bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Kitchin <>
Subject Re: User comments on ticket modification UI
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:46:38 GMT
Okay, I can see the reasoning there, Gary.  In that case, how about moving
the accept/reassign/resolve stuff to the Overview section?  The Status is
already there, we just have to make it editable and add an Assignee field,
or maybe create some status changing buttons below the Overview or
something along those lines.  Taking that functionality out of the submit
button will make it clearer.

Your point about keeping state changes together makes sense to me but at
the moment I don't think the submit button encourages that in any case -
it's at the top, and it jumps to the comment field when used.  This
encourages comments (great!) but not changing anything else in-between
because it's just hopped over it.  If the status/assignment/etc. changes
were made below the spy rather than above it I suspect it would encourage
users to think about the rest of the ticket while they did so, in case
anything else they wanted to change at the same time occurs to them.  The
spy is a bit of a psychological barrier, to my mind - anything above it is
going to be perceived as *the* single fundamental action the user is doing,
while anything done below it is one part of a set of edits to the whole
ticket, and other necessary changes will probably be considered at the same

Amateur psychology at best, I grant you.


On 6 February 2013 10:48, Gary Martin <> wrote:

> On 31/01/13 22:00, Tom Kitchin wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've been following along in the discussion and I've been encouraged to
>> weigh in, so I've just spent a bit of time playing with the ticket layout,
>> and my thoughts are below.
>> My first thought is that the scroll spy doesn't really suit the layout, as
>> has been suggested - on my laptop at least it takes up a considerable
>> amount of screen estate without providing much value - the ticket itself
>> simply isn't long enough to warrant it.  As has also already been noted,
>> the "Modify ticket" button also functions differently from the line of
>> similarly styled buttons next to it.  It might work better if the Modify
>> ticket button was visibly separated from the positional buttons, and
>> became
>> the Update/Submit/whatever button when in edit mode instead of having the
>> "Update (leave)" button above it.  This would cut back on the size of the
>> spy a bit without losing functionality.  The length of the change history
>> isn't a problem if the spy is kept this way, as well - collapsing it
>> strikes me as a bit clunky.
>> I think there's a strange overlap on changes to comments.  I agree that
>> any
>> change should allow for leaving a comment with it, but then we have a
>> section called "Change history" in the page but "Comments" in the spy, and
>> the "Submit changes" button being used to submit a comment even if you're
>> not in edit mode.  We should encourage discussion of tickets where
>> relevant, so making commentary without change easy would be best, I think.
>>   Perhaps just reducing the "Submit changes" text of the button under the
>> comments box to "Submit" would be enough of a change there?  I suspect
>> that
>> a comments box on a ticket with "Submit changes" under it would make me
>> nervous, while just "Submit" reads as submitting a comment when commenting
>> and submitting changes when editing.  Similarly, the Comments navigation
>> button could read "History" instead, which I think also carries a dual
>> meaning which will make sense to people looking for past comments and
>> people looking for the change history.
>> I think accept/reassign/resolve should be buttons outside of edit mode,
>> and
>> should act immediately rather than need submitting.  If they're a set of
>> actual buttons their purpose and immediate effect is completely clear,
>> while embedding them in the Update button dropdown is confusing.  Unless
>> you check the dropdown, what does "Update (leave)" mean, anyway?
>> Tom
> Sorry I have taken so long to consider this. And thanks for the great
> feedback Tom!
> The accept/reassign/resolve actions still really require a submit action,
> particularly as we want to be able to leave a comment on the associated
> event. Even with the case of accepting a ticket, it is not clear cut that a
> comment would not be required even if it is less likely. Also, keeping
> these state changes together with other ticket edits seems better to me so
> that one comment can cover any important things that need to be said about
> the changes as a whole.
> The only area where I think that there is an excuse for immediate
> submission would be things like ticket watching if we are happy that such
> things should not end up being a part of the ticket history.
> Cheers,
>     Gary

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message