Thread started by dmjung
David Jung » Feature requests
When adding a number of similar items, is there a way to carry-over data from the prior entry?
An Add-Another button that sets up the new insert with everything pre-populated from the last item would be OK. Being able to configure what's remembered from item to item would be nice, but at least the manufacturer and scale would be OK.
If there's a way to already do this, I don't see. (Systems I've written in the past used a control+d while in an entry control to recall and duplicate the last data entered there, so that's another approach.)
When adding a number of similar items, is there a way to carry-over data from the prior entry?
An Add-Another button that sets up the new insert with everything pre-populated from the last item would be OK. Being able to configure what's remembered from item to item would be nice, but at least the manufacturer and scale would be OK.
If there's a way to already do this, I don't see. (Systems I've written in the past used a control+d while in an entry control to recall and duplicate the last data entered there, so that's another approach.)
2 7 March 2021, 17:22
Starbase101
I've thought about this too - having some sort of "Add Similar" button would expedite adding multiple similar items, like multiple diameters/colors of wire. Fortunately some of the fields such as Title auto-complete from a previous entry, but re-selecting the product type, packaging, etc can be tedious. However, I would caution against some data fields being copied to a new addition - for example, Product Number and Box Art should be unique for each database entry and maybe best left blank in the carried-over data.
I've thought about this too - having some sort of "Add Similar" button would expedite adding multiple similar items, like multiple diameters/colors of wire. Fortunately some of the fields such as Title auto-complete from a previous entry, but re-selecting the product type, packaging, etc can be tedious. However, I would caution against some data fields being copied to a new addition - for example, Product Number and Box Art should be unique for each database entry and maybe best left blank in the carried-over data.
8 March 2021, 16:13
scalemates
are you requesting to modify the "Add based on" button? or were you not aware of the Add based on button?
It copies scale/brand/topic/Product type from the original entry?
are you requesting to modify the "Add based on" button? or were you not aware of the Add based on button?
It copies scale/brand/topic/Product type from the original entry?
12 March 2021, 20:13
Starbase101
Honestly, I only first noticed the "Add based on" button a couple days ago when adding new database entries. I'll have to give that feature a try the next time I'm adding a batch of related items.
Honestly, I only first noticed the "Add based on" button a couple days ago when adding new database entries. I'll have to give that feature a try the next time I'm adding a batch of related items.
12 March 2021, 20:37
Starbase101
I see it between the Edit and History buttons in a product's Facts section.
I see it between the Edit and History buttons in a product's Facts section.
12 March 2021, 21:51
scalemates
I just made it available for all, before it was restricted to 3 star contributors.
I just made it available for all, before it was restricted to 3 star contributors.
12 March 2021, 21:51
Boris B
Is there a way to improve the "Add Based On" function ? I used it and it is an improvement compared to re-typing everything, but a lot remains to be added. The decal options in particular is fastidious.
Would it be feasible somehow to modulate the Add Based On feature with the Timeline categories : New Box (everything copied) / New Decals (everything but decals) / New Parts (only scale/brand/topic/Product type copied) -- or something like that ?
Is there a way to improve the "Add Based On" function ? I used it and it is an improvement compared to re-typing everything, but a lot remains to be added. The decal options in particular is fastidious.
Would it be feasible somehow to modulate the Add Based On feature with the Timeline categories : New Box (everything copied) / New Decals (everything but decals) / New Parts (only scale/brand/topic/Product type copied) -- or something like that ?
12 March 2021, 22:25
David Jung
OK, I finally found the Add Based On button. Finally. 🙂 I don't normally go to this window when adding items. To get there after adding an item requires clicking on "View" and then the "Add Based On" button?
I haven't tried it yet, but assuming this button does what I'm asking, would it be possible to have this same functionality called with an "Add Based On" button that appears with the "View" button after the initial save of the new item? Basically, eliminate using the "View" button to get to this functionality--sometimes I use the "View" button to see how it looks, but that's not common.
OK, I finally found the Add Based On button. Finally. 🙂 I don't normally go to this window when adding items. To get there after adding an item requires clicking on "View" and then the "Add Based On" button?
I haven't tried it yet, but assuming this button does what I'm asking, would it be possible to have this same functionality called with an "Add Based On" button that appears with the "View" button after the initial save of the new item? Basically, eliminate using the "View" button to get to this functionality--sometimes I use the "View" button to see how it looks, but that's not common.
15 March 2021, 03:07
Starbase101
I always view after adding/editing - it's a good idea to verify correctness before moving onwards with the next item. Just like people should not publish code edits without testing and verifying first - viewing a new addition or revision is how you verify your work. Besides, it's also a matter of scope. In edit mode the context is just that one single item being added/edited. It makes total sense that "Add based on" is visible only in view mode.
I always view after adding/editing - it's a good idea to verify correctness before moving onwards with the next item. Just like people should not publish code edits without testing and verifying first - viewing a new addition or revision is how you verify your work. Besides, it's also a matter of scope. In edit mode the context is just that one single item being added/edited. It makes total sense that "Add based on" is visible only in view mode.
15 March 2021, 04:48
Boris B
The Add Based On button is visible on the main page of a kit, which makes sense : Add (a new item) Based On this kit... Maybe you have not seen it because it was restricted to 3* contributors up to now.
Do you see it here :
MB 326 (Italeri 1308, 1:72)
The Add Based On button is visible on the main page of a kit, which makes sense : Add (a new item) Based On this kit... Maybe you have not seen it because it was restricted to 3* contributors up to now.
Do you see it here :
MB 326 (Italeri 1308, 1:72)
15 March 2021, 12:54
David Jung
Once the View button appears on the Edit window, then I am looking at the item I want to "add based on". Clicking on the new button would by-pass all the I/O associated with populating the view window, clicking on the existing button, and then going back to the edit window in the initial insert state.
If you're adding one or two items, then it doesn't matter. But if you're entering 50 or 100 somewhat similar items, then it would save some time and be a bit less cumbersome. Time is the one resource I can't replace.
I'm verifying correctness using the edit window while entering the data. I very rarely go to the View window when entering items other than if I'm curious about what related add-ons might exist.
Now that I know where the button is actually located, I'll give it a go but it feels inefficient.
Once the View button appears on the Edit window, then I am looking at the item I want to "add based on". Clicking on the new button would by-pass all the I/O associated with populating the view window, clicking on the existing button, and then going back to the edit window in the initial insert state.
If you're adding one or two items, then it doesn't matter. But if you're entering 50 or 100 somewhat similar items, then it would save some time and be a bit less cumbersome. Time is the one resource I can't replace.
I'm verifying correctness using the edit window while entering the data. I very rarely go to the View window when entering items other than if I'm curious about what related add-ons might exist.
Now that I know where the button is actually located, I'll give it a go but it feels inefficient.
15 March 2021, 14:32
Starbase101
That's like saying "I verified my programming by looking at the source code while typing it". That is not verification.
That's like saying "I verified my programming by looking at the source code while typing it". That is not verification.
15 March 2021, 14:40
David Jung
That's what the compiler and testing the run-time are for. 🙂 I think my data entry and verification skills after 40+ years of software development are "adequate".
That's what the compiler and testing the run-time are for. 🙂 I think my data entry and verification skills after 40+ years of software development are "adequate".
16 March 2021, 23:06
Starbase101
Tim, it would be convenient if "Add based on" retained designed for, packaging type, and packaging size. These are often unchanged with "based on" and more-easily modified with new values (if different) than re-populating the same values from scratch.
Tim, it would be convenient if "Add based on" retained designed for, packaging type, and packaging size. These are often unchanged with "based on" and more-easily modified with new values (if different) than re-populating the same values from scratch.
16 March 2021, 23:50
Boris B
More generally (and seriously), the issue as I see it is that information that should not be there (but was carried over automatically) is harder to spot than missing information. What I mean is : it looks like the database is filled in with all the needed info, except it's wrong : for example, the re-boxing should not have the same decal info, but, because the contributor was not careful about what is carried over by a (too powerful) Add Based On function, the db gets populated with wrong info, which is worse than no info...
So the right balance has to be found between 1. Accuracy (most important), 2. ease of use (important because the database grows faster) and 3. responsibilty of the contributors (an essential aspect of the Mates in ScaleMates).
The system as it was involved the 'star rating' of the contributors : only tried-and-true contributors have access to the features that make life easier... which may not seem logical or ideal. But is does preserve the accuracy of information. Maybe that system can be modulated according to the star level (more powerful features for more experienced users, instead of just on/off)?
Another option is to make every step very explicit, with messages like "Warning: you are about to carry over all of this information, please make sure you wnat to do so and it is accurate!". Except that needs to be done both subtly and forcefully, so the 'how' is crucial. In other posts, I have asked about the opportunity of more "How-to" or FAQs on ScaleMates so the technicalities are obvious to even a first-comer.
Then there are more 'technical' options, like the one I suggested above (but they need to be technically feasible..) the process of addig automatically is linked to other features that match it. For example, instead of a single "Add based on button", set up 3 different ones (or a sub-step with the options) : "Add a new version of this kit with new parts" vs. "Add a new version of this kit with only new decals", vs "add a new version of this kit with only a new box". Then the information carried over is taylored to the option chosen (and the timeline option is already filled in).
These are just some ideas, of course...
More generally (and seriously), the issue as I see it is that information that should not be there (but was carried over automatically) is harder to spot than missing information. What I mean is : it looks like the database is filled in with all the needed info, except it's wrong : for example, the re-boxing should not have the same decal info, but, because the contributor was not careful about what is carried over by a (too powerful) Add Based On function, the db gets populated with wrong info, which is worse than no info...
So the right balance has to be found between 1. Accuracy (most important), 2. ease of use (important because the database grows faster) and 3. responsibilty of the contributors (an essential aspect of the Mates in ScaleMates).
The system as it was involved the 'star rating' of the contributors : only tried-and-true contributors have access to the features that make life easier... which may not seem logical or ideal. But is does preserve the accuracy of information. Maybe that system can be modulated according to the star level (more powerful features for more experienced users, instead of just on/off)?
Another option is to make every step very explicit, with messages like "Warning: you are about to carry over all of this information, please make sure you wnat to do so and it is accurate!". Except that needs to be done both subtly and forcefully, so the 'how' is crucial. In other posts, I have asked about the opportunity of more "How-to" or FAQs on ScaleMates so the technicalities are obvious to even a first-comer.
Then there are more 'technical' options, like the one I suggested above (but they need to be technically feasible..) the process of addig automatically is linked to other features that match it. For example, instead of a single "Add based on button", set up 3 different ones (or a sub-step with the options) : "Add a new version of this kit with new parts" vs. "Add a new version of this kit with only new decals", vs "add a new version of this kit with only a new box". Then the information carried over is taylored to the option chosen (and the timeline option is already filled in).
These are just some ideas, of course...
22 March 2021, 09:45
Starbase101
I like the idea of "advanced" settings being available only to "advanced" contributors. It's far too easy to add incorrect data to the site, exemplified by much of the existing data.
I like the idea of "advanced" settings being available only to "advanced" contributors. It's far too easy to add incorrect data to the site, exemplified by much of the existing data.
22 March 2021, 14:30
Spanjaard
yes, and warnings are ignored, specially by those who really should have read them😉
yes, and warnings are ignored, specially by those who really should have read them😉
22 March 2021, 15:44