CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2017/E1789 Semester Project - Revision history

Lwang49: /* 3.3. Form design in summary page */

2017-11-15T21:54:36Z

3.3. Form design in summary page

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:54, 15 November 2017
Line 77:		Line 77:


	Firstly, we lay the ~~teams and questions into~~ the ~~horizontal and vertical columns respectively~~, so that we could ~~avoid~~ the ~~problem of listing the team repeatedly for each question in the previous~~ way~~. At the same time~~, ~~it solves~~ the problem ~~that~~ the ~~team field takes~~ up too much space.		Firstly, we lay the reviewees on the top with its student details, then we just repeat reviewees’ team name in each question. Meantime, we fix the top row when we scroll down the page, so that we could always refer the student details whenever we like. In this way, we solve the problem 2 mentioned above. Now the reviewees don’t take up too much space and it looks more concise.

	Secondly, for questions that require score and comment, we show the score at the beginning ~~of the cell~~, then the text follows. This is consistent with the way that review is shown to the author.		Secondly, for questions that require score and comment, we show the score at the beginning, then the text follows. This is consistent with the way that review is shown to the author.

	~~Finally~~, for the checkbox, it ~~will become easy~~. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ ~~that~~ replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. ~~This~~ also removes the previous comment column.		Thirdly, for the checkbox, it becomes clearer. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ which replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. We also removes the previous comment column which is not needed for checkbox.

			Finally, we redesign the style of the form with keeping the style consistent with other places in Expertiza.

	='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''=		='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''=

Lwang49: /* 5. Test Plan */

2017-11-15T04:57:40Z

5. Test Plan

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:57, 15 November 2017
Line 113:		Line 113:
	Since the main task is about UI design, most of tests executed manually. For the checking updates function, several test code is needed.		Since the main task is about UI design, most of tests executed manually. For the checking updates function, several test code is needed.

	Test case 1: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the chart is displayed properly in the Metrics column, including the numerical data and the appearance. ~~Check~~ if the size is resizable.		Test case 1: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the chart is displayed properly in the Metrics column, including the numerical data and the appearance, ensuring that they are corresponding to the data which should be shown. Also check if the size is resizable.

	Test case 2: Manually open Summary Page, see if the chart is displayed as it is designed, including the numerical data and the appearance.		Test case 2: Manually open Summary Page, see if the chart is displayed as it is designed, including the numerical data and the appearance, check if the checkbox and those save button can respond correctly.

	Test case 3: Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from SubmissionRecord is ~~correct~~.		Test case 3: Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from SubmissionRecord is right and can be correctly shown.

	Test case 4： Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from link-to website is correct.		Test case 4： Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from link-to website is correct.

	Test case 5: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the ~~submissions~~ are ~~marked in~~ green if they are not updated.		Test case 5: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the color of ‘submissions’ words are green if they are not updated.

Lwang49: /* 3.1. Summary of problems= */

2017-11-15T04:49:40Z

3.1. Summary of problems=

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:49, 15 November 2017
Line 46:		Line 46:

	='''3. Reorganize "Review Report Form"'''=		='''3. Reorganize "Review Report Form"'''=
	=='''3.1. Summary of problems'''===		=='''3.1. Summary of problems'''==

Lwang49 at 04:44, 15 November 2017

2017-11-15T04:44:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 15 November 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{huge\|~~Improvements to review grader}}		<span style="font-size:180%">'''Improvements to review grader'''</span>


	='''1. Overview'''=		='''1. Overview'''=

Lwang49 at 04:41, 15 November 2017

2017-11-15T04:41:24Z

Lwang49: /* 5. Test Plan */

2017-11-15T04:30:19Z

5. Test Plan

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:30, 15 November 2017
Line 114:		Line 114:

	=='''5. Test Plan'''==		=='''5. Test Plan'''==
	~~The project~~ is about ~~change~~ the ~~UI Style~~ and ~~improving user experience~~. ~~It does not add any functionality~~ to ~~Expertiza~~. ~~So there~~ is ~~no scope for testing~~ in ~~this project~~.		Since the main task is about UI design, most of tests executed manually. For the checking updates function, several test code is needed.

			Test case 1: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the chart is displayed properly in the Metrics column, including the numerical data and the appearance. Check if the size is resizable.

			Test case 2: Manually open Summary Page, see if the chart is displayed as it is designed, including the numerical data and the appearance.

			Test case 3: Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from SubmissionRecord is correct.

			Test case 4： Write unit tests to ensure the last update time gotten from link-to website is correct.

			Test case 5: Manually open Review Report Page, see if the submissions are marked in green if they are not updated.

Lwang49: /* 3.1. Summary of problems */

2017-11-15T04:27:15Z

3.1. Summary of problems

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 15 November 2017
Line 65:		Line 65:
	*For checkbox questions, comments are not possible, but still a blank cell is displayed.		*For checkbox questions, comments are not possible, but still a blank cell is displayed.
	*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.		*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.



	==='''3.2. Header in summary page'''===		==='''3.2. Header in summary page'''===

Lwang49: /* 3.2. Header in summary page */

2017-11-15T04:26:47Z

3.2. Header in summary page

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:26, 15 November 2017
Line 68:		Line 68:


	=='''3.2. Header in summary page'''==		==='''3.2. Header in summary page'''===

	It will be more reasonable if there is a header in the page. The information of the header will include course name, project name and student number as below:		It will be more reasonable if there is a header in the page. The information of the header will include course name, project name and student number as below:

Lwang49: /* 3.2. Header in summary page */

2017-11-15T04:25:02Z

3.2. Header in summary page

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:25, 15 November 2017
Line 65:		Line 65:
	*For checkbox questions, comments are not possible, but still a blank cell is displayed.		*For checkbox questions, comments are not possible, but still a blank cell is displayed.
	*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.		*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.



	=='''3.2. Header in summary page'''==		=='''3.2. Header in summary page'''==
Line 85:		Line 87:

	Finally, for the checkbox, it will become easy. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ that replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. This also removes the previous comment column.		Finally, for the checkbox, it will become easy. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ that replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. This also removes the previous comment column.



	=='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''==		=='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''==

Lwang49: /* 4.2.2. Check update of link-to content */

2017-11-15T04:24:45Z

4.2.2. Check update of link-to content

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:24, 15 November 2017
Line 109:		Line 109:

	In other cases, we can’t get Last-Modified header from the URL. Like the GitHub Enterprise, generally it requires you to login to access the resources. Even you have logged in, the Last-Modified time is not equal to the latest commit time which is what we want. In these cases, we need to call APIs of the link-to website. As the GitHub and Google Doc should be the most common websites, we will handle these two special types of links.		In other cases, we can’t get Last-Modified header from the URL. Like the GitHub Enterprise, generally it requires you to login to access the resources. Even you have logged in, the Last-Modified time is not equal to the latest commit time which is what we want. In these cases, we need to call APIs of the link-to website. As the GitHub and Google Doc should be the most common websites, we will handle these two special types of links.



	==='''4.3. Mark not updated review'''===		==='''4.3. Mark not updated review'''===

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:41, 15 November 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{huge\|Improvements to review grader}}


	~~='''Improvements to review grader'''=~~		='''1. Overview'''=


	=='''1. Overview'''==
	In expertiza, review report page and summary page give the information for instructors to view the overall review result. Also, they are the place where instructors grade the reviews. Review report page can be accessed via Manager -> Assignment, then click the '''“View review report”''' button (the one which has a spyglass and two people). The '''summary''' can be accessed through Review Page by clicking “summary” button of a particular student.		In expertiza, review report page and summary page give the information for instructors to view the overall review result. Also, they are the place where instructors grade the reviews. Review report page can be accessed via Manager -> Assignment, then click the '''“View review report”''' button (the one which has a spyglass and two people). The '''summary''' can be accessed through Review Page by clicking “summary” button of a particular student.

Line 28:		Line 26:


	=='''2. Visualize Metrics column'''==		='''2. Visualize Metrics column'''=
	==='''2.1. Summary of problems'''===		=='''2.1. Summary of problems'''==
	Metrics column, which is in “Review Report Form”, displays statistic data of words used in particular student’s reviews. This helps graders to value how the student compares with the average student. For now, it displays numerical data in the literal way which is not intuitive. It would be better to have a bar or column chart showing this. Ultimately, we may be showing several metrics in this column, so the bars or charts should be resizable.		Metrics column, which is in “Review Report Form”, displays statistic data of words used in particular student’s reviews. This helps graders to value how the student compares with the average student. For now, it displays numerical data in the literal way which is not intuitive. It would be better to have a bar or column chart showing this. Ultimately, we may be showing several metrics in this column, so the bars or charts should be resizable.

Line 36:		Line 34:


	==='''2.2. Chart design in the metrics'''===		=='''2.2. Chart design in the metrics'''==


Line 48:		Line 46:


	=='''3. Reorganize "Review Report Form"'''==		='''3. Reorganize "Review Report Form"'''=
	==='''3.1. Summary of problems'''===		=='''3.1. Summary of problems'''===


Line 66:		Line 64:
	*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.		*Checkbox questions could be displayed more compactly, better in a visually appealing manner like the review is shown to the author.

	==='''3.2. Header in summary page'''===		=='''3.2. Header in summary page'''==

	It will be more reasonable if there is a header in the page. The information of the header will include course name, project name and student number as below:		It will be more reasonable if there is a header in the page. The information of the header will include course name, project name and student number as below:
Line 73:		Line 71:
	For example, the header will show as '''“CSC 517 OSS PROJECT : Student 666”'''		For example, the header will show as '''“CSC 517 OSS PROJECT : Student 666”'''

	==='''3.3. Form design in summary page'''===		=='''3.3. Form design in summary page'''==
	We totally redesign the form in order to arrange the space more properly. The form looks as below：		We totally redesign the form in order to arrange the space more properly. The form looks as below：

Line 86:		Line 84:
	Finally, for the checkbox, it will become easy. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ that replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. This also removes the previous comment column.		Finally, for the checkbox, it will become easy. The result will show as ✔ or ✘ that replaces the previous manner of using 0 or 1. This also removes the previous comment column.

	=='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''==		='''4. Check updates for reviewer'''=
	==='''4.1. Summary of problems'''===		=='''4.1. Summary of problems'''==


Line 95:		Line 93:
	In the review report, each team that has been reviewed is color-code. Text in <span style="color:red">red</span> indicates that the review is not yet completed; text in <span style="color:#0000FF">blue</span> indicates that the review grade is not assigned or updated. So if an instructor sees a name in <span style="color:red">red</span>, the student should not be given credit for the review. If text is in <span style="color:#0000FF">blue</span>, the instructor should grade it now. But another common case is after the reviewer has reviewed the work, the author didn’t update it. So the reviewer doesn't need to re-review the work. These reviews should be coded with another color (perhaps <span style="color:green">green</span>). Therefore, it should be checked whether the author has submitted new files or links since the previous review, even the content pointed to by pre-existing links.		In the review report, each team that has been reviewed is color-code. Text in <span style="color:red">red</span> indicates that the review is not yet completed; text in <span style="color:#0000FF">blue</span> indicates that the review grade is not assigned or updated. So if an instructor sees a name in <span style="color:red">red</span>, the student should not be given credit for the review. If text is in <span style="color:#0000FF">blue</span>, the instructor should grade it now. But another common case is after the reviewer has reviewed the work, the author didn’t update it. So the reviewer doesn't need to re-review the work. These reviews should be coded with another color (perhaps <span style="color:green">green</span>). Therefore, it should be checked whether the author has submitted new files or links since the previous review, even the content pointed to by pre-existing links.

	==='''4.2. Add checking mechanism'''===		=='''4.2. Add checking mechanism'''==
	To learn whether submission has been updated since the previous review, we need to get the latest updated time then compare it with the latest review time. In expertiza, one submission contains two types of content -- link and file. Both two types should be considered. For file, we just need to look at the last modification time. For link, you need to consider more: the link string itself, and the content that the link points to.		To learn whether submission has been updated since the previous review, we need to get the latest updated time then compare it with the latest review time. In expertiza, one submission contains two types of content -- link and file. Both two types should be considered. For file, we just need to look at the last modification time. For link, you need to consider more: the link string itself, and the content that the link points to.

	===='''4.2.1. Check update of file and link string'''====		==='''4.2.1. Check update of file and link string'''===
	In expertiza, there is a SubmissionRecord class that stores the records of each submission. Thus, for the file and the link string, we could simply get the update time from the records.		In expertiza, there is a SubmissionRecord class that stores the records of each submission. Thus, for the file and the link string, we could simply get the update time from the records.

	===='''4.2.2. Check update of link-to content'''====		==='''4.2.2. Check update of link-to content'''===
	For link-to content, situation becomes much more complicated. The types of the links are various, and how to get update times from them is what we need to focus on.		For link-to content, situation becomes much more complicated. The types of the links are various, and how to get update times from them is what we need to focus on.

Line 108:		Line 106:
	In other cases, we can’t get Last-Modified header from the URL. Like the GitHub Enterprise, generally it requires you to login to access the resources. Even you have logged in, the Last-Modified time is not equal to the latest commit time which is what we want. In these cases, we need to call APIs of the link-to website. As the GitHub and Google Doc should be the most common websites, we will handle these two special types of links.		In other cases, we can’t get Last-Modified header from the URL. Like the GitHub Enterprise, generally it requires you to login to access the resources. Even you have logged in, the Last-Modified time is not equal to the latest commit time which is what we want. In these cases, we need to call APIs of the link-to website. As the GitHub and Google Doc should be the most common websites, we will handle these two special types of links.

	==='''4.3. Mark not updated review'''===		=='''4.3. Mark not updated review'''==
	After we got the status of submission(updated or not), we could simply mark the not updated reviews <span style="color:green">green</span> to indicate that it doesn't need to be re-reviewed.		After we got the status of submission(updated or not), we could simply mark the not updated reviews <span style="color:green">green</span> to indicate that it doesn't need to be re-reviewed.



	=='''5. Test Plan'''==		='''5. Test Plan'''=
	Since the main task is about UI design, most of tests executed manually. For the checking updates function, several test code is needed.		Since the main task is about UI design, most of tests executed manually. For the checking updates function, several test code is needed.