Talk:Imeji Scope

MPDL,Imeji_MPDL

= Usability tests - feeback = This content might be relocate to another page.


 * Create Collection and upload images: Features are not easy to find
 * Create collection: Directly after the log in, it would be nice to have an overview about what the user would like to do today (similar to PubMan). --> has to be specified (JIRA ticket)
 * Upload Images: The functionality is not easy to find, it would be better to make this more visible e.g. through an ico. --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket similar to the point below "view collections")


 * Metadata Profile
 * Very complicated to find (no direct link, only accessible via Collection Metadata)
 * Confusion between Collection metadata and metadata profile
 * Should be accessible as a separate link "Metadata Profile" via the collection navigation + directly via the collection list --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)


 * Create Metadata Profile
 * The creation of a metadata profile is hard to find --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket similar to the point above for the "metadata profile")
 * Multiple is easy to miss --> multiple should be more visible --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)


 * Edit Metadata:
 * Simple edit: easy to find via popup, hard to find via detail view, because in imeji the user is used to that all functionality is bundled in the menu on top of the page, and now one functionality is at the bottom next to the data itself --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)
 * Multiple metadata: Impossible to find if the user doesn't know it --> Was genau ist hiermit gemeint?
 * Icon (triangle) is used for both multiple edit plus select menu: confusing --> select and edit functionality should be displayed with different icons --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)
 * Triangle is often not seen as an icon --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)
 * Predefined values are not offered for the user to choose --> Bug (to check if it is already in Jira)


 * View collections:
 * Actions link (upload/release, etc.) are not easy to notice. An icon should be used in addition to text. --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)


 * Workflow actions (release, delete, discard)
 * Should always be validated by a popup message, which explains what is going to happen. --> Improvement (to check if it is already in Jira)
 * Delete collection/delete images is confusing on collections images page
 * with delete, the deletion of all pictures is meant, with release, the release of the whole collection --> has to be separated --> GUI aspect (JIRA ticket)
 * Actions and status should use the same wording (for example release/publish should be avoided, use of publish only instead) --> release is only technical and should not be mentioned in the GUI --> has to be changed in the labels bundle

= Mikikos Feedback =
 * We need functions that to delete or replace images. We often need to delete images that are no longer necessary, or replace them to better images in the album that they are editing.


 * DATE need to be linkable. FACES used to allow users to input a URL to the DATE, so that researchers link the date information to whatever they need to refer to. For example, experiment DATE can be linked to the laboratory note that describes more details attach to the experiment data with the DATE. This is very important function in eResearch environment.


 * It should be very useful to provide a "sort funtion" of metadata, which allows users to define multiple metadata. For example,  'Laser power' or 'Date of sample preparation' in a image at http://test-faces.mpdl.mpg.de/faces/collection/968/image/973/view, those metadata may be sortable in display. That would be very useful. Or, it should be worth trying to provide just a banck field that users freely discribe about the image, like a data table in this example case.

= Basic Meta Data =
 * I'd strongly vote for having Basic MD (for all images) + Specific MD (collection-specific) --Rupert 11:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What about having title, description, dates (created, modified etc. - created for start would be sufficient), subject (keywords), creator - as in PubMan (person or organization - in latter case could be even an instrument e.g. microscope) as common metadata?
 * That would be fine. --Rupert 15:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Currently in Faces (and also in Diamonds) we do not have description. Further on, subjects are to general (we want to make customizable metadata sets) and date modified is very raw when working with pictures. The metadata I am fine with is title (filename) and date created (therewith I mean the date when the picture was actually taken). Further on, we also could use date uploaded (when the picture was uploaded into the system). --Kristina 06:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)