Create documentation - #1
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Might be worthwhile explaining when you would use Not Applied and Not Assessed. The other applications are guideline specific but I don't know if its intuitive of why something would be in the not applied or not assessed category
|
@jennifer-bowser Could you put a priority label on this (asking so I know when I need to review by) |
I haven't done a deep dive on what you wrote, but I would recommend linking to these files in the repo README if you don't want to go the mkdocs route. I would guess most people would not look in the documentation folder |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great first pass @jennifer-bowser ! Made some suggestions on things that could be added to make the tutorial more thorough.
IMO, I would prefer a GH pages site using Zensical (apparently mkdocs is no longer maintained). GKM-Starter Kit has been updated with this migration.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: Consider adding images of what these concepts look like in the UI
| ## Assessment Statuses | ||
| Assessments move through a lifecycle of the following statuses: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. `Pending` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: I know it's kind of self explanatory, but we should state what these statuses mean. Also how the demo handles Reviewed (since in somatic, we only allow clinical directors to perform review)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
General comments on images: Some of these are outdated with the latest changes in demo site, I'd recommend updating for consistency (could be a separate ticket if we're expecting more changes). For example, we no longer have an avatar / include emails for users
| - _Move_ the assessment to the next or previous status | ||
| - _Overtake_ an active assessment from another user | ||
| - _Review_ the assessment's status history, including _who_ previously checked out the assessment and _when_ | ||
| 3. The **summary modal** lists the assessment's assertions (left) and displays a summary of the selected assertion (right), including its: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: Did we want to add in editing an assertion?
| - _Applied Evidence_: A summary list of the evidence currently contributing to that result | ||
| 4. **Evidence tabs** contain the evidence for each assertion type. | ||
| 5. The **table of contents sidebar** allows quick navigation to the various sections of the assessment. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion:
- Info tab?
Made this note in the agenda:
Kind of related. https://github.com/GenomicMedLab/igm-varcat-ui/issues/1228 (can make it a general update the info panel ticket; if we're going to have the info panel showing we should update the docs here)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: May also want to call out the user dropdown if we want to include everything.
Separate concern that can be handled in a separate issue: Demo version does not display (should we just remove or hardcode so people aren't confused about a lonesome #)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: Do we want to display the history revisions?
| Review each evidence section and update it as needed. You can: | ||
|
|
||
| - Curate your own additional evidence manually | ||
| - Revise the section's auto-selected code | ||
| - Change the section's auto-computed score | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: Did we want to include a screenshot of the rationale modal?
|
|
||
|  | ||
|
|
||
| If needed, add new evidence with **Add Evidence**. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: Did we want a tutorial on walking through the add evidence modal?
Here's the documentation I've created for the demo site to explain to grant reviewers how to use VarCat. The files are numbered to indicate the order in which they are designed to be read.
I'd LOVE feedback, especially on the following:
mkdocsto create a smallread-the-docs-type website à la the gkm starter kit?