You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Bringing this up, if the categories implementation is still of interest and in the backlog, as the domains are present in CMS already. Should probably reflect the same domains as in CMS?
From a UX standpoint, it's possibly one of the simplest ways to increase visibility on the big picture, ie. which domains are getting attention and which are not. Also would provide opportunity to build further insight related features on top of those,
re: decred/politeia#678
Proposal categories require capturing additonal metadata. On the backend, decred/politeia#1214 was canceled and instead domains will be handled by decred/politeia#1442 . On the frontend the new metadata will be handled by #2459 .
Bringing this up, if the categories implementation is still of interest and in the backlog, as the domains are present in CMS already. Should probably reflect the same domains as in CMS?
From a UX standpoint, it's possibly one of the simplest ways to increase visibility on the big picture, ie. which domains are getting attention and which are not. Also would provide opportunity to build further insight related features on top of those,
re: decred/politeia#678
There's a simple design pattern ready how they could be interacted with, as possibly a second filtering layer below the status categories (applied to each of them): https://xd.adobe.com/view/44a3298e-a814-42b2-643e-3aa39c8dec34-3292/screen/fd5e3ea1-7702-49a8-a171-05fef2eeb570/ (ignore the placeholder content on cats)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: