CLC UI and Architecture

[Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>]

Hi -

I think that the CLC application’s UI is what caused the negative reaction. It looks like a scoring system because it presents that way. This may be fine, but if your purpose is evaluate what you can do to improve your repository a more exploratory system would be more helpful and less intimidating.

(1) There are actually only a few words that are being flagged. Ones that are problematic according to the context.

(2) I don’t think that scorekeeping is helpful, but search would be.

What if repositories were indexed in Apache Solr and guided search forms created? The results could be in Solr’s default UI. A project could then perform whatever research they wanted.

Putting repositories into a search engine serves other purposes as well.

Regards,
Dave

Re: CLC UI and Architecture

[Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>]

On 9/3/21 1:21 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> I think that the CLC application’s UI is what caused the negative reaction. It looks like a scoring system because it presents that way. This may be fine, but if your purpose is evaluate what you can do to improve your repository a more exploratory system would be more helpful and less intimidating.
> 
> (1) There are actually only a few words that are being flagged. Ones that are problematic according to the context.
> 
> (2) I don’t think that scorekeeping is helpful, but search would be.

As someone who has this work as a job responsibility, scorekeeping is 
very helpful, in the "how much progress have you made on this" kind of 
question that my manager asks every Thursday at 1pm.

> 
> What if repositories were indexed in Apache Solr and guided search forms created? The results could be in Solr’s default UI. A project could then perform whatever research they wanted.
> 
> Putting repositories into a search engine serves other purposes as well.

Yes, that does indeed sound useful, for projects that already have a 
notion of what words/phrases/patterns they wish to address in their project.

Also what we need to do more of is documentation of words/phrases with 
1) reason why it might be a problem and 2) recommended/suggested 
replacements/rewordings.

-- 
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
@rbowen