CDR Tickets

BZDATETIME::2010-10-13 11:15:32
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::1

After talking with Diana we came up with the idea to possibly frame inserted, link-elements as shown in the attached example.
We still would need to decide if we want the link color be red and the frame in blue or the frame in red and the link in red etc.
My personal preference is to display the link in red to clearly identify it as inserted text.

Attachment lala.html has been added with description: Sample of modified Link Display

BZDATETIME::2010-10-19 17:37:13
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::2

I'm working on the changes discussed with the following two sample documents on MAHLER:
CDR62955 - Breast Cancer Treatment (Patients)
CDR62972 - 714-X (HP)

The modified filters so far are:
CDR339576.xml - Module: InLine Markup Formatter
CDR380956.xml - Module: STYLE BU Insertion Deletion
CDR380957.xml - Module: STYLE RS Insertion Deletion
CDR380958.xml - Module: STYLE QC Summary

There are four different flavors of the GlossaryTermRef display (Patient, Patient BU, HP, HP BU). I've updated the filters and CSS to display the patient versions and am currently working on the display for the advisory board flavor which only exists in HP summaries and of those only the CAM summaries contain GlossaryTermRef elements.

Margaret asked me to put this on hold until she had the opportunity to discuss these and other proposed markup changes with the board managers.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-14 14:45:36
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::3

William, did you have a look at these changes at all?

I was wondering if it would make sense for CIAT to have a look at these changes since it will obviously affect the users or the QC reports.
Also, since Margaret is out at the moment maybe it might help if you could comment on these changes.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-14 15:37:46
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::4

No. I have not since it was on hold for a while and also it appeared you had not completed making the changes. I can review the changes if it is Okay to do so at this time.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-16 10:26:18
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::5

Yes, please take a look William. This seems like a helpful enhancement to the QC reports and it's holding up other changes so I think we should move forward. Thanks.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-16 10:55:13
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::6

(In reply to comment #5)
> Yes, please take a look William. This seems like a helpful enhancement to the
> QC reports and it's holding up other changes so I think we should move forward.
> Thanks.

I just did and it looks good and works as Volker has described. I believe users will like this as well.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-16 11:49:45
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::7

I just took a look at these changes with Diana and we noticed that some of the inserted and deleted glossary terms in the patient Breast Cancer Tx summary redline QC report were not showing up with boxes around them, as I think should be the case. (ie the terms diagnosed and recurrent in the prognostic factors section).

In 714-X, the changes looked good but I noticed something unrelated to this issue - the approved and published markup showed up the same way (red text) in the redline QC report. Should publish be orange or different somehow? I haven't tested this on Bach to see how it usually displays but I thought I would mention it.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-16 16:08:22
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::8

(In reply to comment #7)
> In 714-X, the changes looked good but I noticed something unrelated

No, this is not unrelated and yes, the publish markup should look differently.
If I remember correctly the text should also look kind of brownish with the light background. I'll check with Victoria to double-check.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-16 17:26:28
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::9

I take that last comment back. According to my documentation the publish and approve markup is displayed identically and Victoria just confirmed this.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-17 15:14:48
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::10

(In reply to comment #7)
> I just took a look at these changes with Diana and we noticed that some of the
> inserted and deleted glossary terms in the patient Breast Cancer Tx summary
> redline QC report were not showing up with boxes around them, as I think
> should be the case. (ie the terms diagnosed and recurrent in the prognostic
> factors section).

I didn't understand why these changes were not showing in the QC reports for the patient versions because I was certain this worked at some point in the past.
Now I found the answer - Robin and I were running different programs to create the reports. When the QC reports are run the output is created via the QcReports module but when I'm developing the filters I am using the DocumentFiltering module.

So, while I will work on fixing the differences between these two QC report paths Robin and Diana could look at the QC report output for patient summaries by using this interface:
http://mahler.nci.nih.gov/cdrFilter.html
Enter the CDR-ID, select the revision level, remove the Doc Version entry and enter for the Filter ID
set:QC Summary Patient Set

Or you could just wait until I fixed the problem.

BZDATETIME::2010-12-20 13:31:14
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::11

(In reply to comment #10)
> Or you could just wait until I fixed the problem.

All of the insertion/deletion markup in the patient summary were listed with the source set to advisory-board. Since the source is set to editorial-board by default for all patient summaries the markup never did look correct.
I've removed the source attribute value ... et voila - it now seems to work (until you're telling me otherwise).

BZDATETIME::2011-01-06 10:54:49
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::12

(In reply to comment #11)
> et voila - it now seems to work

I agree! I reviewed the Breast Cancer Tx and 714-X summaries in their RS and B/U QC reports and tested all levels of markup. The links look good to me as marked.

Diana and Victoria, please take a look at the two summaries on Mahler (Breast Cancer Treatment [patient] & 714-X [HP]) if you haven't already just to be sure this meets your needs. If so, then I think it's ready to be promoted.

Thanks!

BZDATETIME::2011-01-11 11:21:12
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::13

Diana had reported in an off-line message that the links were looking OK.

Once the filter changes for the new Comment attributes in OCECDR-3277 are complete we'll be able to move this to production along with the other two issues that are related.

BZDATETIME::2011-01-11 16:11:25
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::14

Victoria has also checked the QC reports and verified that things look okay.

BZDATETIME::2011-01-26 13:00:58
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::15

This issue is ready to go and will be moved to production along with OCECDR-3277 and OCECDR-3280.

BZDATETIME::2011-02-16 16:23:24
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::16

The following filter have been copied to FRANCK and BACH:
CDR335166.xml - Module: Checkbox Formatter - R10032 (OCECDR-3277)
CDR339576.xml - Module: InLine Markup Formatter - R10032 (issues OCECDR-3280, OCECDR-3245)
CDR380956.xml - Module: STYLE BU Insertion Deletion - R10032 (OCECDR-3277,4934)
CDR380957.xml - Module: STYLE RS Insertion Deletion - R10032 (OCECDR-3277,4934)
CDR380958.xml - Module: STYLE QC Summary - R10032 (OCECDR-3277,4970,
4934)
CDR409593.xml - Copy XML for Summary Report - R10032 (OCECDR-3280)
CDR434822.xml - Module: QC Filter Templates - Summary - R10032 (OCECDR-3280)

The following program has been copied to FRANCK and BACH:
QcReports.py - R10033

Please verify on BACH and close this bug.

BZDATETIME::2011-02-18 09:51:43
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::17

Verified on BACH; closing this bug. Thanks!

BZDATETIME::2011-04-06 16:45:17
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::18

We only made this change for GlossaryRefs, but Diana would like to also change the display for SummaryRefs and SummaryFragRefs, so I'm reopening this issue.

BZDATETIME::2011-04-14 09:15:17
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::19

At last week's status meeting we decided to hold off with this latest request until Margaret had a chance to talk to all of the board managers because some of the latest requests may end up in the output send to board members.

BZDATETIME::2011-05-12 09:57:27
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::20

(In reply to comment #19)
> At last week's status meeting we decided to hold off with this latest request
> until Margaret had a chance to talk to all of the board managers because some
> of the latest requests may end up in the output send to board members.

We have discussed this with the rest of the Board managers and Diana, and we've decided to keep things the way they are. So, we won't be implementing this for SummaryRefs or SummaryFragRefs. The consensus among the group was that this would be too many boxes.

BZDATETIME::2011-05-12 09:58:50
BZCOMMENTOR::Robin Juthe
BZCOMMENT::21

Closing this issue.