@emmajclegg This mean that we need to fix the UX. And we need to make change in the flow design and then work on it. What do you think?

@praweshsth - if you can propose some ideas for changes to the user interface, I would be happy to discuss them (before the next fortnightly call if useful). Any screenshots would make it easier to comment - e.g we were looking at these wizard examples yesterday for inspiration.

@emmajclegg

Since this is UX issue, we should go ahead with designing the UX for it. Based on that only, we can do an estimation for development. So will it be ok to put an estimation for design first and work on it and come back and put estimation for development?

@praweshsth - yes sure, go ahead and estimate work for the design step

I'm moving this to "to do" based on the estimation for design work. Happy to discuss on our call tomorrow @praweshsth

We have worked on the flow of publishing. We felt that the users weren't made aware enough of what was going on while the process took place. So, we've tried to address the problem here. Please have a look at the flow and we've also added a video of how the interaction in the flow looks like.

Figma Prototype

Thanks @shreyaydi - this is looking really good! That's much clearer what's going on.

A few comments, which I'm happy to discuss with @praweshsth on the call tomorrow:

• To reduce the number of steps in the workflow, could the core elements and deprecated code check (steps 1 & 2) be combined so that the user gets feedback for both together? Whilst it's good that deprecated codes are checked as per #1407, I think this - i.e. Step 2 - can happen in the background without the user needing to see it explicitly as a step.
• "Continue" is a more commonly used word than "Proceed" for the forward action buttons
• It looks like the "Ongoing Tasks" bar flashes slightly when the box has been minimised and an action completes? If so, making this even more obvious to users would be good so there's no chance of people missing it.

Questions

• If no issues are found for steps 1 & 2 (i.e. core elements are complete and deprecated codes have not been used), does step 3 (validation) automatically start? I think it should, to minimise the number of times the user has to click.
• If issues are found, does clicking one of the arrows in the screenshot below take the user to that activity's overview screen?

We've updated the flow according to the discussion we had in the last meeting, please have a look at the prototypes linked in this issue. The first link is for the flow with incomplete core elements and deprecated codes and the second one is without them.

If you face difficulties or don't know where to click, you could simply use the arrow buttons on your keyboard to navigate through the flow design.

If there are any comments on the flow, please let us know or post a comment by pressing the "c" button,

Bulk publish 1

Bulk Publish 2

cc: @praweshsth

Thanks both - this is looking good. Let me show this to the wider support team tomorrow and I will get back to you with any comments we have.

Hi @shreyaydi (cc @praweshsth) - sorry for the slight delay with feedback; I wanted to make sure I had input from across the support team.

We think the workflow order and the data checks that are being run are good. What could be further simplified however is the information displayed to the user about which checks are being run (the users just care about publishing and don't need to see so much detail)

i.e. we think the workflow could be shown as simply as two steps - 1) Checking, 2) Publishing :

The "Checking" step will still check core value completeness and deprecated codes. If there is an issue with either, the process can stop and show the feedback screen below:

If there is no issue with either, the "Checking" step will progress straight to IATI data validation, then stop to give the feedback screen below:

If no validation errors are found, the process will continue straight to step 2 - Publishing, without the user needing to click.

In future, to further simplify the process, we may consider pausing the process pre-publication only if the data validation errors found are critical. However, we need to better understand what the impact on data quality would be so are not suggesting doing this for now.

In addition to the comments above, I have commented directly on the (Bulk publish 1) Figma workflow with some suggested wording changes to text.

I hope this makes sense - any questions please let me know!

We've worked on the flow by reducing the process to a two step process. Please have a look at these 4 prototypes here:
1. Bulk Publish flow
This is a basic flow of how our import will look

2. Bulk publish with no issues encountered
This is a flow if there are no issues found in any steps and the publish finishes in one go. (the user doesn't minimize the popup)

3. Bulk Publish with no issue encountered and user minimizes the popup
Since we do all the needed checks in Step 1, we think users should have the choice to make pop-up notifications smaller right from the beginning. In this way, users can make the pop-ups smaller during the first step and finish publishing without any interruptions. They'll only see the blinks after publishing is done.

4. Bulk publish with issues encountered in each step and user minimizes the popup
This flow is basically what happens when the user minimizes the pop up and issues are encountered in each step.

I have also addressed the Figma comment

Please have a look at it and let us know if there are any confusions

cc: @praweshsth

Thanks @shreyaydi - the workflows look good. I've added a few minor comments to the Figma flows about interface text, and one question on the "Deprecated Code Check" tab here.

Otherwise - I'm happy with the design and for your team to start on the development work.

cc' @praweshsth

@Sanjivchy

• 1. Before publishing, change Button label to "CONTINUE PUBLISHING" as per figma design

• 2. On minimized state, While checking for data to be published, do not show validation error until status is completed

• 3. On minimized state, after validation check, Beside Ongoing Tasks, there should be 0/1 since publishing has not been completed. Also, there should be Cancel and Continue button as per figma design. Upon clicking the continue button, the modal should be expanded

Expected Result

Flow in case of some issues: https://www.figma.com/proto/upgUy5i65LYC3iiqYVnACW/IATI-Publisher-Platform?node-id=14428-39273&viewport=-27564%2C-25424%2C0.55&t=J5SjYA5kEiHqFagD-0&scaling=scale-down&starting-point-node-id=14443%3A38061&show-proto-sidebar=1

• 4. Add Minimize button while checking for core elements and depreciated codes ( Will not be done, since at this time we will not have any status from backend)

• 5. Message related to data qualities is not displayed

Expected Result

• 6. Add "Clear" button after publishing is completed and change "VIEW DETAIL" to "View Details" on minimized state

Expected Result

• 7. On a minimized state, during the checking state, the count of previously selected activity is displayed for a few seconds

This is looking really great guys! Everything looks to be working as expected - my one comment is can we get rid of the "Publishing alert" that appears when a user first clicks to publish an activity? :

I don't see it as necessary - it's intuitive from the activity overview screen what's being published for the first time vs. republished, and the language in this message is confusing. Removing it would streamline the process further and mean one less click for the user.

@emmajclegg we have made the changes as per your feedback. Please review it.

thanks @praweshsth - all looks good!

@Sanjivchy @subash-cm Moving this to Todo, xls import not working on this change. Specifically the popup on the bottom right doesn't show up.

Closing this issue. Has been deployed to production with necessary fixes.