CRM-21419 Prevent users from accidentally creating a single activity when they want multiple #11264
Conversation
Instead of a checkbox for the user to choose to create separate activities for each contact, use a set of radio options in order to prompt the user to make a decision. This helps prevent users from accidentally choosing to create combined activities.
|
(CiviCRM Review Template WORD-1.0)
|
|
HI, User Anne here! I've had a look at the before/after screenshots and explanation. If I understand it all correctly - and if you are seeking my 'user' perspective, then here it is:- I really like the option to HAVE TO CLICK to choose either option and the 'error message if I forget to check the box. I often create multiple activities/emails and often I want to personalise one or more of them. This would seem to give me the ideal solution. Currently, for those I wish to individualise, I have to create separate activities/emails, so this would be a great help if most of the info in the activity is common. The ERROR message will prevent me forging on and accidentally sending to multiple contacts by mistake. So, I like this idea very much from a USER perspective. I really don't mind the extra step and we soon get used to small changes like this (if we see the error message often enough! |
|
As always, how people use the system will influence what they think of this PR. Personally the change Sean has proposed fits in nicely with how we use CiviCRM . I would like to note though that the consequences of creating one activity with 10,000 contacts no longer has the diabolical performance hit it used to have on the loading of the activities screen. |
|
Thanks @AnneDru and @joannechester 🙂 Now that we've had two user opinions on |
|
I've looked it over and agree with this change & Tim's review. |
|
seems a regression has been introduced with this change. We cannot add multiple target contacts to case activities. No radio button is shown and formrule error gets displayed on Save(screenshot from dmaster). @seanmadsen is it possible for you to take a quick look at it?
|
|
😲 I will look at this today. Thanks for raising this here, @jitendrapurohit |
|
Just a little meta/retrospective on this one -- in the review, I had tested a few screens/pageflows, and I wanted to say, "This works in all the screens that I've tested, but there are others that should be tested." I had commented:
Of course, the last bullet wound up being significant, and I feel bad having labeled it
I do think it's important and legitimate to quickly communicate when you've "tested X but not Y". The simplest change would have been to summarize as |
|
Thank you for reflections and update. A good solution - I would definitely have read more into Pass(*) then was the reality.
With warm regards,
Anne
for Anne, Bob & the SW team
Dru South West
01579 351385
07818 625567
southwest@druworldwide.com
… On 5 Dec 2017, at 22:25, Tim Otten ***@***.***> wrote:
Just a little meta/retrospective on this one -- in the review, I had tested a few screens/pageflows, and I wanted to say, "This works in all the screens that I've tested, but there are others that should be tested." I had commented:
(r-run <https://docs.civicrm.org/dev/en/latest/standards/review/#r-run>) Pass(*):
I tried creating activities using "Contact => New Activity". Used three configurations: (a) with a single person, (b) with multiple people and combined activity, (c) with multiple people and separate activities. Tried leaving fields blank (and observed expected validation messages) - and then created the activities successfully.
Then ran a report and saw the activities were as expected <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1336047/32627558-b4a38a4a-c547-11e7-8c5f-422c7a92c521.png>
I did not test any other activity-creation screens (like the ones embedded in "View Contact" or "Manage Case"). That might be a smart thing to do...
Of course, the last bullet wound up being significant, and I feel bad having labeled it Pass(*). Two things seem significant:
The asterisk is too subtle.
The visual size and placement made the third bullet seem insignificant -- when, in fact, it was really an outstanding task.
I do think it's important and legitimate to quickly communicate when you've "tested X but not Y". The simplest change would have been to summarize as r-run: Incomplete or r-run: Partial instead of r-run: Pass(*).
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#11264 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/Af4HGeSy6b3nzPd4hCTssZq-7XCGl-hxks5s9cK9gaJpZM4QYch8>.
|
…eparation CRM-21419 Prevent users from accidentally creating a single activity when they want multiple
Overview
When creating a new activity with multiple contacts, CiviCRM offers a checkbox to "Create a separate activity for each contact". This is good.
But the "separate activity" use case is common enough, that missing the checkbox can lead to users accidentally creating combined activities. This mistake is bad because it prevents users from being able to make independent edits to those activities for different contacts.
Before
Users commonly want this box checked, but it's easy to forget to check it.
After
"Activity Separation" is a required field, which prompts the user to make an intentional choice.
"Activity Separation" only appears when multiple contacts are chosen (just like the checkbox did).
If you submit the form with multiple contacts but nothing selected for "Activity Separation", then the form does not validate.