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

Read-only summary/review page #1704

Closed
jingtang10 opened this issue Nov 9, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #1738
Closed

Read-only summary/review page #1704

jingtang10 opened this issue Nov 9, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #1738
Assignees
Labels
effort:small Small effort - 2 days P2 Medium priority issue type:enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jingtang10
Copy link
Collaborator

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The review page currently has an "EDIT" button that allows the user to go back to the questionnaire. But there is a need for just having a read-only review/summary page in certain use cases.

Describe the solution you'd like
Create a new setting to allow for the review/summary mode to be readonly

Describe alternatives you've considered
We could also render the normal questionnaire and make all questions readonly. But that seems to be unnecessary. Why do we render the widgets if they can never be editted anyway?

Additional context
NA

Would you like to work on the issue?
NA

@jingtang10
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hi @shelaghm do you have any input regarding this?

@shelaghm
Copy link

Some questions:

  • How would someone access the read-only/summary page? Is something they land on after completing the questionnaire? OR something they can see after a questionnaire is completed and they access the completed questionnaire from the patient card?

Some suggestions:

  1. I agree to visualize in a similar dense layout as the review page, not render the normal questionnaire. This is easier to parse, especially when you can't edit anything.
  2. Keep the layout the same as the review page, but remove the edit button
  3. Adjust the labels on the navigation buttons. In this case maybe only have "close"?

Screenshot below of mockup. WDYT @jingtang10 ?

Screen Shot 2022-11-10 at 14 19 46

@jingtang10
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jingtang10 commented Nov 11, 2022

thanks @shelaghm - the mocks look great.

i think the read-only thing may just be a totally different mode for questionnaire. because if it's read-only then there's no point taking the user through the actual questionnaire. so basically when the user opens the questionnaire the library will decide to do the following.

  1. normal questionnaire (which will take the user through the pages, with an optional review page at the end), or
  2. read-only questionnaire (which is just the review mode without edit button)

does this make sense?

@joiskash @nsabale7 @f-odhiambo for visibility.

@shelaghm
Copy link

That makes sense to me @jingtang10

@joiskash @nsabale7 @f-odhiambo It would be helpful to hear about your use case for using read-only so we can make this this component is meeting your needs. Do you have any context to add? Thanks!

@santosh-pingle santosh-pingle added type:enhancement New feature or request P2 Medium priority issue effort:small Small effort - 2 days labels Nov 14, 2022
@parthfloyd
Copy link
Collaborator

@shelaghm For Em Care we are going to use read-only mode questionnaires to show users previously filled questionnaires of closed consultations (Hence user may only require to see the questionnaire view similar to review mode without the option to edit it)

@joiskash
Copy link
Collaborator

@shelaghm we currently do not have a use case that requires this. But the conversation above seems reasonable to me. I have nothing more to add

@shelaghm
Copy link

Thanks for the feedback @parthfloyd and @joiskash. Very helpful

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
effort:small Small effort - 2 days P2 Medium priority issue type:enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: Complete
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants