Misleading revision history information
under review
M
Michael Hospodarsky
The Revision History pane is very confusing to read, because it displays information about multiple actions actions performed by multiple users. AK didn't unpublish the article, but in the first image it appears she did because that's what reads next to her icon. And we didn't think to expand the "Workflow history" button because it cuts off at "Workflow hi..." even though there's enough room for all the text to be visible next to the "Fork", "Delete", and "Open" buttons.
Here's how we interpreted the information before we expanded the workflow history:
In one "cell", it reads to the end user that AK forked v2 from v1 (correct), unpublished the article (incorrect), AND left the comment (incorrect). It also lists a date (this Tuesday) but that date doesn't represent the day the article was forked – it represents the day the article was unpublished. Yet the date is listed right next to "v2 forked from v1".
Overall, this pane could use a lot of UX improvement. For example, why even hide the workflow history under a tab? it'd be nice to see all this history in one continuous scrollable pane without having to open dropdowns, in my opinion (not sure about other users). Or, have one pane for version history and a second pane for workflow history across all versions. I think I also saw another feature request where someone asked to increase the size of the text because it was too small.
I would hope these changes could be on the higher priority side, because this feature has so many uses (auditing, collaboration, cross-referencing) that I'm sure users open this pane often, like myself.
Thank you! :)
Log In
D
D360 Product Management
marked this post as
under review
M
Mukesh Sriram
Hi Michael, thanks for sharing the information. We understand the confusion behind the versioning and history info that is currently displayed. Having said that, I don't feel the logic behind why and how this is built is questionable at the moment, because it's been in place and has been used all these months-years by a lot of other consumers. However, I'll anyways get it cross-verified if whatever you stated above is a critical pain/blocker or if we will have a quick workaround on this. Also, post the analysis, I'll be happy to get on a call and explain it you all myself so we are all on the same page. Thanks again.
M
Michael Hospodarsky
Mukesh Sriram
Very understandable, Mukesh. We are fairly new to Doc360, so now that we're aware with how this pane works it's much less confusing. But at first glance, we actually thought Doc360 was incorrectly tracking which users were unpublishing/publishing articles.
No need for a call, but thanks for looking into this! If other users aren't struggling with this pane/feature, I understand not prioritizing it or changing anything. Thank you! :)