Design Review Important Info vs Important Note
Comments
-
@Gordon Collett the Old page can actually be fully closed also, but I do prefer only the title (yes, @dontiknowyou, not just the first 4 lines). Not a huge deal, but if they're at a point where Notes will be developed, just thought I'd let @lyleblunttoronto1 know. With the possibility of 3000 characters, seeing the whole note could get rather lengthy. Initially, the example of the Important Notes that was provided, actually shows that when the banner is activated (opened), the Notes that are marked Important will display the title and one line, so that's not so bad, if that's what occurs....
1 -
We are leaning toward adding a Notes card to the side instead of moving the notes section from collaborate page.
A maximum of 3 notes would display. Notes marked as alerts/cautions would be displayed first.
How would your user flow be effected with different options:
Should the note open on the side sheet or a full popup?
SHOW ALL - would take you collaborate tab
ADD NOTE - option on notes card. Ability to add a note without leaving the details page.
3 -
@lyleblunttoronto1 You will need to add the images one at a time. Loading multiple images in one comment is not working correctly.
2 -
I like the change of wording in the warning banner.
Notes should open in a full pop up. There were too many complaints about the formatting of long notes when you tried the side panel for then before.
Agree that Show All should just go to the full collaborate page.
I think adding notes would work best just on the full page rather than trying to do it from the side pod or a pop up.
3 -
I'd be in favor of a note full popup when selected. I like the idea that alerts/warnings could appear on top of the Details - it shouldn't really interfere because either go to collaborate tab or read note in popup and then close and go back to Details. I'd even prefer warning notes to popup by default when the profile/details are accessed - so the user would have to close the note.
Add note being available could be handy.
1 -
@lyleblunttoronto1, regarding your comment, "adding a Notes card to the side instead of moving the notes section from collaborate page", with a maximum of 3 notes displayed. You mention, "Notes marked as alerts/cautions would be displayed first"; does this mean that if 5 notes are marked as alerts/cautions that there will be a way for the user to prioritize the Notes marked as alerts/cautions? Also, I presume clicking on the Alerts/cautions banner would open the "3 notes displayed" in the side notes card, as previously demonstrated in your initial development post? If not, please elaborate on what happens when the user clicks on the banner....
Option comments:
"Should the note open on the side sheet or a full popup?" FULL POPUP would be my preference!
"SHOW ALL - would take you collaborate tab" GREAT!
"ADD NOTE - option on notes card. Ability to add a note without leaving the details page." GREAT!
@Sam Sulser what does your comment, "You will need to add the images one at a time. Loading multiple images in one comment is not working correctly" mean for users, e.g. mark alerts/cautions to populate the Notes card to the side? Or is this just an internal system thing meant for Lyle?
0 -
The number of alerts/caution notes will be limited. We are considering just 1, but no more than 3.
If you click the banner it will do as shown in the mockup before. If there is only 1 alert/caution note it will just open the note.
The images were not loading in my original community post @Sam Sulser was helping me out, by clarifying the issue.
2 -
I prefer the full page of notes, and to be able to right-click to open the page in a new window.
Usually I compose notes in a text editor, in a window beside the window(s) I am looking at.
3 -
As I wrote somewhere upthread, a single flagged note would simplify life. There wouldn't be the perpetual question of "do I create a new note, or do I add to the existing note?"
If the side-panel display can be fixed not to eat whitespace/formatting, then I think I'd prefer that to a popup, unless the popup were fully configurable (size and placement) and allowed scrolling of the page beneath. And perhaps-not-obviously, I'd like for the note that opens to be editable right where it is. I hate the current trend toward layers upon layers of extra windows/popups. (The UI equivalent of drawers behind doors.)
One suggestion: I know it'd be somewhat redundant, with the Collaborate tab's count being Right There, but would it be possible for the new Notes card to have the count in parentheses, same as how Research Help has it? Anything that makes collaboration notes more visible is a Good Thing, I think, and this would be a small-but-useful bit of extra visibility.
1 -
@lyleblunttoronto1 it appears that the banner will be the thing requiring the least amount of trouble, and the other changes proposed may just be unnecessary. Couldn't the banner just be linked to the collaborative notes section and transport the user there, then there wouldn't be yet another side panel to navigate? If there a way under the collaborative section to mark a singular note as an important alerts/cautions note? Wouldn't that accomplish the same purpose and reduce the design issues, especially if you're just considering 1 alerts/cautions note now?
0 -
I like the new wording, icon and color of the design suggestion suggested in the post below!
- I prefer to open the note as a full popup. I would be concerned that if it opened as a side note the user might not notice it as much. The fact that it would be a popup would require the user to close it, which would also help them recognize it's importance.
- I like the idea of adding a notes area in the right column also and the idea of showing the notes marked as alerts/cautions first. I also like the ability to add a note without leaving the details page.
- Question? How will the user know that they can create a note that becomes an alert? Not sure if there is a way to let users know about this capability? Because this feature only appears if you check the box in the notes area, how will users know it's even available as a feature? Could it be "promoted" in the Notes area? Maybe a link that becomes a popup within the Notes area or Collaborate area?
- My Layout Settings. I hadn't noticed this in the past, and I think this is a nice feature, but - please don't allow users to move the Alert/Caution note out of it's position at the top of the page. While many users may not use this feature (by the way I really like it!), if we allow users to hide this new Alert/Caution we will have defeated it's purpose.
- Number of Alert/Caution notes. This is a challenge - how do we prioritize notes? Because there are multiple users, I think we have to accommodate more than one Alert/Caution note. Example: I may have 20 sources attached for a person, and another person attaches 1 source, but their source has direct evidence that none of my 20 sources do. It's always possible that that one source can be "the" source that clarifies identity and/or relationships. I think 3 is a good number, it allows for a few different persons to add their perspective. I don't think that will happen often, but I think it can happen.
- I've always wished there was a way to attach a "confidence level" or "strength" to a source, all sources are not equal! Interestingly, you can do this in desktop software, like RootsMagic. You can mark a source Original, Derivative or Don't Know, the information as Primary, Secondary or Don't Know and the evidence as Direct, Indirect, Negative or Don't Know. Could something like this be added to Sources? Could a Source be marked with the same capability as a note to become an Alert?
1 -
3. “How will the user know that they can create a note that becomes an alert?”
Part of the reason for the note side card will be to help users know they can add an alert. Still working on the words, something like “Add Note or Alter” “Add alert note”
4. please don't allow users to move the Alert/Caution note out of its position at the top of the page.
No, we will not allow users to move the alert. It would defeat the whole purpose.
6. We have been discussing Person/Source confidence levels, source value, person completeness and comparative accuracy. I hope we can show some feature ideas to the community, once we come up with a few approaches.
6b.Could a Source be marked with the same capability as a note to become an Alert?
We discussed the idea of relationship alert notes and decided to keep things simple and let features grow organically. We do like these kind of ideas. They get us thinking outside of the box.
3 -
We considered not showing notes on the details page. Here are a few thoughts.
Part on the reason for creating the card is also to advertise the note alert feature exists when there are no alerts. The other part is to increase communication, especially for new users.
In our analysis of the life sketch data, it seems notes are not convenient enough. 1/3 of the entries had less than 100 char. Most of these tended to be quick notes such as: “Stone mason”, “Twin to Ella Elaine”, “Died at age 86”, “Step child to Duncan”, “1910 Census states she is the mother of 5/4 living”, “Death record of father indicates Harold is adopted”, “Titanic victim”, “Cause of Death: Drowned”, “parents unknown”, “Lieutenant colonel”, “Occupation - Farmer”
We hope the notes side card will guide these kind of entries into better locations.
4 -
6. We have been discussing Person/Source confidence levels, source value, person completeness and comparative accuracy. I hope we can show some feature ideas to the community, once we come up with a few approaches.
@lyleblunttoronto1 Questions: Is FamilySearch considering automating/authoring some Alert/Caution Notes upon profile completeness or perhaps for recent deceased/marked deceased? It seems to me there may be some advantage to FamilySearch authoring some Notes to users - in special cases/conditions. Of course - y'all already author the locked/Read Only alert that appears on some prominent profiles - so in my mind I believe all profiles should be working toward that status - once completeness is sufficient why not have a profile reach that state? (yes then people wanting to edit that profile either have to contact FamilySearch or just create another duplicate - which can be problematic)
0 -
We have not considered authoring Alert Notes for completeness. But that is an intriguing idea that I'll make sure is brought up in our discussions. Impedance is our first thought; slowing users down, force them to consider, instead of preventing change. Some indication of completeness may invoke this impedance, but there are a lot of use cases to consider.
3 -
I wonder if the reason "Notes" ends up attracting these simple, out of place kinds of information is because of it's title. The word notes is very general and can easily suggest it as a catch-all for people when they can't figure out where to put things. So, I suggest examining the title and I would again suggest "Research Notes" for the title. The specificity of this title should encourage research-based notes, which would hopefully thin out the number of less meaningful entries going forward.
0 -
@kcarter3829911 It was Life Sketch that was attracting these kind of entries. So convenience wins over title. I would rather have these entries closer to the conclusion data if possible, but notes is a great alternative as a catch-all.
2 -
Along the lines of joint family group/ association note - I am wondering if there could be an easy way to have multiple authors contribute/comment on one alert/Caution Note. If one person doesn't use up the 3000 character limit but could 'tag/sign' their section - leaving room for others to contribute? I'd especially be in favor of near relations/family group having priority edit - so maybe allowing a spouse, child, near descendant override a caution note from a more distant relation - after all an alert/Caution from such close relation should have some priority of representing their near relation profile? Priority editing probably would not be necessary 4/5 generations back from living descendants. More than one contributor to alert/caution note would especially be an issue on prominent people profiles - but in many/most cases they are already read only.
It also seems - if it ends up being first come first serve - maybe there could be some template/examples of a well-written caution/alert provided - it seems starting from some outline/structure would be where I would initially start. For example, one might always start with an alert/caution about birth, then marriage/family, then death - 'don't mistake this person A born [date] [location] [parents] with similar person B born [date] [location] [parents] - but then that could be automated input whenever some one selects 'not a match' any record hint (otherwise why the record hint) - and what about resolving mistaken 'not a match'
...
Anyway I'm just trying to think ahead about what kinds of alerts/cautions I might want to add - that couldn't be included in existing reason statements/notes elsewhere. It just seems it's a redundant thing but because many people don't usually read existing profile notes maybe it could help. But again if the note doesn't already popup when accessing the profile - what makes us think they won't just ignore this alert/caution, not read it, and continue with replacing good profile information with bad?
Hopefully, this explains why I think having the note automatically pop up would be better impedance than just the alert/caution banner.
1 -
Not sure where this comment should be discussed, but here goes.
- I wonder how many users attach sources in the Couple Relationship and Parent-Child Relationship pop-up screens? I would bet not many. I usually put a source or two in the Couple Relationship pop-up, but rarely in the Parent-Child Relationship pop-up. Has there been any discussion of putting all sources in one area? Perhaps subdividing the Sources area to include these two sections? It seems to me that this would be a more intuitive approach. I know that even if I do put a source in the Couple Relationship area, I usually also add it to the Sources too.
- Further, couldn't all sources in each of these areas be merged into the "General" Sources list automatically?
- What if we added tagging capability for Marriage and Child to Parent Relationships? Something like this:
3 -
More thoughts on relationship sources.
I discovered the new Other Relationship feature a few days ago and have been using it to enter the enslaved persons some of my ancestors held. I think this is a great new feature that hopefully will allow those trying to find their ancestors that were enslaved. But, I also feel the way these people's sources are entered reinforces the need for all sources to be included in the main sources area on FamilySearch.
An Example: Daniel GNZ4-32Y. Daniel was listed in the 25 Feb 1783 inventory of my 4th Great Grandfather, John Carter's estate as a "Negro Man." Daniel was sold by Robert Carter, John's eldest son, in 1783 to Presley Neale, husband of Mary Carter, John Carter's daughter. Presley Neale died in 1815 and left Daniel to his son Daniel Neale, in his will. So, Daniel has 3 sources, at least, regarding his enslavement, and no sources that have been found regarding his life. Using the information in these 3 sources I can infer that Daniel was born before 1762 because he was listed as a "man" in 1783, suggesting he was over 21. I can also record that Daniel's residence was Westmoreland County, Virginia in 1783 in the household of John Carter. And, I can record that his residence was still Westmoreland County in 1815 and that he was in the household of Presley Neale from 1783 until 1815. The 3 sources are all added to the Slavery Relationship pop-up. But, if you leave them there, the Person Page for Daniel lists 0 sources, even though there are 3 sources "hidden" in the relationship area. So, I usually just duplicate my sources, so that other users (who rarely, if ever, bother to look for relationship sources) will be able to see them. This is just wrong! I would venture that most users either don't put in relationship sources, or never see them.
I would argue that relationship sources are usually more important than most vital sources. Relationships are really what we are trying to prove in family history. A tree can't be built without proving relationships. But, on the FamilySearch tree, relationship sources are relatively hidden. While I understand the intent of attaching these sources to the relationship, I just don't think it's intuitive, or very easy to do. Being within a pop-up just seems to make the process of adding sources less comfortable.
I argue that relationship sources, regardless of where they are entered, should be displayed in the "Sources" area. Putting these sources in the "general" sources area would increase their visibility and simplify the user experience. And, they would be included in the number of sources displayed. To me it's crazy that these sources aren't displayed numerically—they're so important!
Further, if I want the same source to be used for evidence of other events, like residence, in this case, I have to then go to the "general" sources area and attach it again.
0 -
Below is my mockup showing my idea for an alternate layout for the Person Page that incorporates the new notes area on the right column. I also placed the Vitals in the first column opposite the Family. This is similar to Ancestry.com, but sources aren't displayed in this idea, whereas on Ancestry they are displayed. I also showed an idea where the color of the Note headline is the same dark orange as the Caution Banner, I think this would help the user to quickly see which notes are intended to be cautionary. My goal is to display the family and the vital information in as close to a one-screen view as possible. I believe this type of layout makes it easier to work in the tree and compare the vital information to the highlighted person and their family while working.
It seems like it would be possible to offer this view as an option in the My Layout Settings? Below also is a comparison of this layout with the current layout showing how much you can, or can't, see without scrolling.
The comparison shown is on a large monitor - probably a little larger than many users use.
Thanks Chas Howell for letting me know about posting the images one at a time. Above you should see the side-by-side layout.
1 -
@kcarter3829911, you might try posting your images one at a time. That method seems to give better results.
1 -
Oops! See my comment and layout comparison below.
0 -
Here's a comparison of the side-by-side layout I uploaded with the current FamilySearch Person Page. Showing how much more information is visible in one screen.
1 -
Adding notes to the side banner is a bad idea, it just increases scrolling down to look for things you need.
Notes are not really used here because this site attracts novice genealogists who don't write or take notes on anything. This is only going to get worse the more this site focuses on mobile users at the expense of PC users. Adding this to the side bar will not change this.
I have yet to find useful and purposefully written notes, most seem to be GEDCOM file imports of some manner. The rest seem to be copy and pasted things off other genealogical websites about the person.
I have used notes sparingly to document extensive areas of research I have done and to explain the methodology but I have not seen others do this.
And we do not need a third column on the details page.
The new person page layout still looks bad and is inefficient.
FS seems to keep trying to reinvent the wheel with each update which I do not understand. Where any of the heavy FS users complaining about the existing person page layout?
0 -
My response to some of these comments:
Adding notes to the side banner is a bad idea, it just increases scrolling down to look for things you need. I can't disagree more. The addition of notes will provide a way for those who have done extensive research to notify others and possibly keep them from making changes. And, what items are you feeling are being pushed down that you use often? Search Records? Latest Changes?
Notes are not really used here because this site attracts novice genealogists who don't write or take notes on anything. While I agree with this statement, I also believe that FamilySearch needs to attract retain and attract more experienced genealogists. This feature is one that may do that. I'm a very experienced genealogist and I will continue to use FamilySearch as well as Ancestry, MyHeritage, FindMyPast and of course I will always keep my own desktop software file as my master file, in my case RootsMagic.
I have used notes sparingly to document extensive areas of research I have done and to explain the methodology but I have not seen others do this. I do this also.
And we do not need a third column on the details page. My suggestion (and I don't work for FamilySearch) is that they offer this view as an option accessible in the My Layout Settings area. In the current new Person Page you can select Double Column. I would like the three column layout above that is quite similar to Ancestry's layout. (See attached image) The beauty of responsive web design is that it can offer options like these and make the site work on all platforms.
The new person page layout still looks bad and is inefficient. That's a pretty broad statement. I also don't feel that the page layout is as efficient as I would like. My whole reason for suggesting the three column layout I uploaded was to make the vitals and the family visible without scrolling.
Where any of the heavy FS users complaining about the existing person page layout? Good question. I have no idea on what all of the reasons are for going to a new interface. But, the train has left the station and I'm trying to influence which way the train goes rather than trying to stop it. I applaud FamilySearch for creating this space for us to share our concerns and ideas though.
1 -
The notes section is going to be ignored, even more so then the reason statements already are. It is only going to display 3 notes at a time meaning people will likely spam it to make "their" note stay visible.
Notes are only something really used by experienced genealogists.
The tools will be pushed down which I use daily.
0 -
Feel free to collapse the section and ignore it then. That will only push down tools by a insignificant amount.
I am curious, however, other than Merge by ID which I use occasionally, and am using less and less as the tree get cleaned up, what Tools do you use so often?
My Layout Settings only needs to be used once. Possible Duplicates in the the Research Helps section and never needs to be accessed from Tools (It really should be renamed to "Show All Research Helps" since that is what it actually does. It is identical to the Show All link in the Research Helps pod.) Find Similar People I rarely find helpful so hardly ever use it. Report Abuse I've never used. Delete Person I use about once a year if I accidentally create a duplicate and it is easier to delete than merge. Print is another one I find little use for.
Having the Notes pod plainly visible will teach those begining genealogist you seem somewhat disparaging of that a Notes section does exist and demonstrate how to use it. Having all the notes freely editable as they are now means that if someone does "spam" the section and put as the only alert note "this is my g-g-grandfather - don't touch him" that anyone can un-flag the note and remove it from the Notes pod, not to mention just delete it all together.
From your other post, you also make me wonder what size of monitor you use and what resolution. A person's profile page only expands widthwise so far. On my 24-inch (4480 × 2520) monitor when I am using the two column setting and the page width is expanded to maximum, the sides of the databox are only four inches apart. Both sides are well within my field of vision and I don't have to move my eyes at all to click the pencil. Even using the single column view which wastes a bunch of room that is just white space, it's only eight inches, needing only an insignificant twitch of the eyes. Are you using some type of zoom setting that causes the person's profile page to be far wider than designed?
Also, as soon as one enters the "invisible box" which one learns is there pretty quickly, it is no longer invisible and I don't even need to look for the pencil, just slide down the grey stripe. When the grey disappears, I'm over the pencil and can click. Most importantly, the position of the pencil will encourage people to click in the grey box and first evaluation whether they actually need to edit anything or not.
1 -
I see the new Notes area and ability to mark an Alert Note is here. Looks good. I'll let you know if I run into any trouble when testing it.
2 -
I assume translations of the banner text are coming later...?
0
