How is the home page module list sorted?

When I load - what is the sorting technique used to display modules? Clearly it’s not alphabetical; I’m sure it’s something, but can’t quickly figure it out without going to look through the code. :slight_smile:

It’s sorting by total downloads.

Maybe a good idea (for now) would be to add a heading above that table, or something similar?

What I’d really like to do is show different information on the home page–possibly an intro / help message, a list of recently updated module, a list of popular modules, maybe something statistic about developers? dependencies?

In short I’d like to make some mock-ups and have a discussion on what the home page can show :slight_smile:

1 Like

That could be a quick win for the short term, e.g., “Most Popular Modules (by total downloads)”

The other ideas are all solid as well but longer term design strategy.


1 Like

Here’s a mockup I put together for what I have in mind with the home page:

(via the wiki)

It incorporates some of the other new features that have been ticketed (icons, folksonomy tagging). I think it’s a good starting place, what do you think?

1 Like

It’s a good start. I fear there’s too much going on visually though. :smile:

I would simplify and have a repeated visual pattern of label + horizontal list of modules.

For the “new to modules” section, perhaps we should be showing a specific curated list of modules like “modules included in the last OpenMRS release”.

1 Like

This isn’t a bad start. I especially like quickly seeing new & most “popular” at a glance. Hopefully you could drill down into each for more detail. :thumbsup:

I would make sure any “new user” content is dismissable and that action is remembered somehow for repeat visits.

Icons are good for scanability, but we’d need to quickly get icons associated with each module, or assign some type of random image for each ala Gravatar icons here on Talk.

Also, I would prefer “tag” to “category” because technically something can only belong to one category, and that wouldn’t match the folksonomy approach.