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

Implement the first major design iteration of the collection editor #1464

Closed
BenHenning opened this issue Feb 4, 2016 · 8 comments
Closed

Comments

@BenHenning
Copy link
Member

The style of the editor looks very stark, and does not match the style used by the exploration editor. In order to fix this, the collection editor should be setup to better match the exploration editor in workflow and design as a baseline. A final, first iteration needs to be designed and implemented as part of this issue.

This issue should also address some concerns @jacobdavis11 brought up to help avoid user confusion:

  • The 'Add Exploration' button should be placed in a more logical position.
  • Explorations (collection nodes) should be re-orderable.
  • Prerequisite skills should use a drop-down of options populated by acquired skills to avoid typos and user errors when selecting prerequisite skills. It may be nice to also have something similar for acquired skills to avoid forcing users to type in existing skill names (this involves some investigation/exploration).

Those specific recommendations do not need to be implemented as part of this issue, but the problems they caused should be addressed by whichever solution fixes this issue.

These originally came from #1462. Furthermore, the work in #1462 is primarily validation and error functionality. This issue includes ensuring the errors are nicely displayed to the user.

Here are the second versions of the hand-drawn mocks for the first major iteration of the collection editor. @amgowano, @seanlip , and @xtyang have all contributed ideas and/or reviewed these.

img_20160318_175525

This issue involves implementing the above mocks. A more detailed technical breakdown needs to be done.

@seanlip
Copy link
Member

seanlip commented Mar 14, 2016

@BenHenning -- maybe post your mocks here at some point?

@BenHenning
Copy link
Member Author

Here are the second versions of the hand-drawn mocks for the first major iteration of the collection editor. @amgowano, @seanlip , and @xtyang have all contributed ideas and/or reviewed these.

img_20160318_175525

@BenHenning BenHenning changed the title Improve the design quality of the collection editor Implement the first major design iteration of the collection editor Mar 19, 2016
@jacobdavis11
Copy link
Member

A few quick questions:

  1. The explorations shown here are all in a line. How would this work if I had a branching dependency tree?
  2. When you say "automatic skill generation and assignment" do you mean that each line will be regarded as a skill that is provided by the exploration on the left and required by the exploration on the right? If so, what are these skills then used for?
  3. It seems a bit odd to have a left-to-right direction of progress here when in the state graph progress is made top-to-bottom.

@BenHenning
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for the feedback @jacobdavis11.

  1. No branching will be supported in the initial collection editor. This functionality may be added later.
  2. Yes, that's correct. The skill will probably have the name of the exploration being completed. I think skills are going to be more useful once we figure out what branching conceptually means in a collection, as well as when we extend collections beyond just organizing explorations (and move into concepts like having a review section and badges for completing parts of the collection, or even linking collections together). Much of the more powerful uses of collections are more easily possible with skills. Since this is the MVP of the editor, skills will play a backseat role, for now.
  3. Is odd significantly bad in your opinion? If not, I lean toward keeping this. The exploration state graph should be vertical because it's sharing the horizontal screen real estate with the state editor, which takes up a lot of room. Also, the state graph can be completely ignored when creating an exploration, whereas this graph is the actual editor. I'm not entirely convinced whether the graph should go horizontal or vertical, but horizontal makes more sense to me initially because that better uses the screen real estate. I do not think this is a permanent orientation for collections, especially once branching is introduced.

@BenHenning
Copy link
Member Author

@amgowano, can you break down the work needed to complete this task? You're tackling some of the features in #1687, but it would be great to see an enumeration of all the work that's needed. If you can, please group the items into buckets representing PRs. For instance, in #1687 you have implemented the collection node graph with deletion functionality and removed the current node list. #1687 should also include displaying the collection nodes in their play order and updating the sample collection YAML to have a linear progression. The other tasks needed to finish this can be split up into future PRs.

Thanks!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 11, 2016

Implementation breakdown:

  1. Implement a visual layout of the nodes.
    • Update the UI to display the node in a linear layout according to their play order.
    • Update the sample collection YAML file to have a linear regression.
    • Implement a delete functionality on each node.
    • Implement the shift functionality on each node.
  2. Implement addition of a new node to the list.
    • Change UI to match the mock.
    • Implement addition of a new exploration.
    • Implement addition of an existing exploration by searching for them.
    • Add the ability to search for existing explorations by filtering only those that the user has created.

@kevinlee12
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @amgowano, any updates on this issue? Thanks!

@BenHenning
Copy link
Member Author

This is currently in progress with #1687 and #1928.

BenHenning added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 5, 2016
Fix part of #1464: implement the collection editor node list (PR 1/2; this is to bring Abe's changes into the central Oppia respository)
BenHenning added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 5, 2016
Provides a base implementation for the collection editor node list without dragging being used for scrolling.
@seanlip seanlip closed this as completed in 9f1f339 Jun 6, 2016
joshuacano pushed a commit to joshuacano/oppia that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2016
…pia#1993)

Provides a base implementation for the collection editor node list without dragging being used for scrolling.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants