Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 23, 2017. It is now read-only.

Figure out a "messy data warning" pattern #689

Closed
noahmanger opened this issue Sep 16, 2015 · 10 comments
Closed

Figure out a "messy data warning" pattern #689

noahmanger opened this issue Sep 16, 2015 · 10 comments
Assignees

Comments

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor

We need a way to warn users when data may be messy or inconsistent, and provide an explanation for why that may be.

@jmcarp
Copy link
Contributor

jmcarp commented Sep 16, 2015

For example, computed versus reported fundraising aggregates are likely to be a least a little different. Related to this, we may want to add notes on methodology for interested users--e.g., how exactly do we compute aggregates?

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Depending on how long those notes on methodology are, it could really be a set of pages on the website. Kind of an in-depth data glossary.

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thinking more about this I like the idea of some sort of icon + tooltip pattern. The meaning we're trying to convey, as I understand it, includes:

  • Warn users of any time when we make complicated judgement calls (e.g. the Unique Only filter on receipts)
  • Warn users when aggregates are based on free-text or otherwise ambiguous data (e.g. the disclaimer at the bottom of the aggregate Disbursements By Purpose table on committee pages)

I think in cases where we have the real estate, such as the By Purpose table, we can simply display the text, but I think it would be good to have it accompanied by the icon. In other cases, such as with a filter, it's good to display it with a tooltip, but again, might be helpful to have an icon in the filter label.

I'm not sure if the what we're going for is more "warning" or more "methodology explanation", so not certain on the right approach to iconography, but would love @jenniferthibault thoughts on this.

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Usability note: in the case of the "Show Unique" filter, it would be nice to have the tooltip show when an icon is focused / hovered, rather than the field or label itself, so that it doesn't obscure other filters. (See discussion here 18F/fec-style#101)

@jenniferthibault
Copy link
Contributor

@noahmanger, what about this icon with this tooltip implementation?

screen shot 2015-09-23 at 1 45 32 pm

screen shot 2015-09-23 at 1 44 19 pm

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

I like the icon. But would we want to use the same one in the alerts that we're using elsewhere on the filters (where we currently use the exclamation point icon)?

@jenniferthibault
Copy link
Contributor

I was thinking that "alert" and "more information" were different kinds of info, and should have different icons. The interactions are also a little different, where here you interact with the icon, and an alert is presented to you without your interaction.
I may be misunderstanding though, do you mean the exact same icon should be used, or a more similar icon style?

@noahmanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm. Just to think this through out loud here:

The "alerts" here aren't actually alerting to something "new" or a difference in state. It's not that something has changed or that you stumbled on a particular edge case (unlike the "No data" messages when you go to a committee that hasn't filed reports or if there's an error in loading data for a table).

In this case, the messages are more about providing additional information and context to what you're looking at. And because it's the same type of contextual info that the tooltips offer, it makes me think that we should make the two feel like the same thing.

Does that make sense? Certainly open to args for the contrary.

@jenniferthibault
Copy link
Contributor

I think it makes sense. What I'm hearing is that instead of using the "alert" pattern in the disclaimers in #736 (which is what the latest mockup shows), we should possibly be using this tooltip pattern for the disclaimers. Is that right?

Glad to talk this one out in a video chat, I think we're close @noahmanger .

@jenniferthibault
Copy link
Contributor

A quick call figured this out! Solution: what's happening here is ok and great, but what needed to happen was just switching the exclamation point mark in #736 with a matching "i" info mark so that the cue was the same.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants