GSoD 2019 : Review and Refactoring our Information Architecture for OpenMRS

@marslan8530 will have a look

1 Like

hey @c.antwi can we schedule a conference call in upcoming days this week?

@marslan8530 can we still go with Thursday’s 8pm EAT as the REST API Team did last week , is that ok with you ?

@tendomart this means 5pm UTC right?

1 Like

@ball @dkayiwa @c.antwi @jennifer @jwnasambu could you be having inputs on how we can best help @marslan8530 to get passed this blocker that he is facing?

Did you take a look at the links for Testers and Subject Matter Experts?

A Tester can be an expert in the subject matter of Testing. Any subject matter expert can be a volunteer and is a contributor. What do you find misleading on the tester information page? What is out dated for subject matter experts?

Hey @dkayiwa For non-technical users, people interested in testing OpenMRS may be taken somewhat as a trail version before the actual implementation. That’s what i reffed to while saying “misleading”

And as you said “tester can be an expert in subject matter of testing” and “any subject matter expert is a volunteer” so my point is we should arrange all these information for persona(s) and page intended for volunteers. Separate categorizing upfront should be done between contributors, service provider or implementer, new users and other personas we have developed. Then we can sub-divide.

Regarding Outdated information, information for someone who is interested in translating or documentation should be details of projects we’re looking to work on and suggestions if they intend on working on some problem they found them self. We’ve classified and given details of “Clinical Content Experts” and so on. I don’t get the logic behind this. On page next to this Documentation review work needed we haven’t mentioned type of expert needed for a task which makes this page awkward.

I may be missing out on something as i don’t know much about OMRS as you people do. That is why i’m asking for enlightenment.

This is not correct. Not all subject matter experts are volunteers.

Everyone who does something is a contributor, regardless of whether you are a volunteer or not.

Can you update the information which you think is out dated?

My suggestion is that you start with only those that you understand. Then we can continue to discuss and refine those that you do not.

How would you state this to make it clearer?

@marslan8530 I’ve looked at one Org on the list you have provided , but their Doc is not very user friendly , the rest are however fine.

@marslan8530 ya right , hope @c.antwi has confirmed , right after the Operations Call.

Yes, as per my understanding. But i wanted your suggestion regarding objections I’ve raised but by the looks of it, you seem to be pretty okay with the information present there and as you have more interactions and experience within the community. So i’d just work on IA and leave the information as it is for now

okay.

I’ll just look for a suitable place for this information for now as per your suggestion. Information inside can be edited afterwards

I’m fine. Lets wait for @c.antwi if she’s available to confirm

@tendomart yes, there are some which are outdated, some which are decent and some good. I’ll use all for comparison nonetheless. Thanks for your input

1 Like

Actually Navigation and content composition were my hinderance as a first time visitor, spent over 10 minutes trying to look for developer resources without success.

1 Like

Hahaha :smile: maybe you looked at VistA

No i actually found trouble at Open Dental’s Documentation , not withstanding though , i loved their pictures.

Oh okay. If you want to tell me more about it, you may make a personal thread. I’d love to hear your feedback

I’d like to join the call on Thursday - and I have a conflict with 5pm UTC. Can we possibly move it to 1pm or 1:30pm UTC?

1 Like

oops seen this late. Unfortunately i have not heard from @c.antwi @jennifer are you still available that time ?

Lets wait for @c.antwi to be back and we can decide then