CDR Tickets

BZDATETIME::2012-01-05 12:22:16
BZCOMMENTOR::Margaret Beckwith
BZCOMMENT::1

Lowered priority. Not sure when this will be required by Cancer.gov.

BZDATETIME::2012-04-24 09:52:32
BZCOMMENTOR::Margaret Beckwith
BZCOMMENT::2

We decided to take a different approach for the section-level mapping of Eng. and Spanish versions on Cancer.gov. That approach is described below, and I changed the subject line to reflect the new approach. I left the priority at 7 since this won't go in until Release 6.6.

Volker and I thought about this some more. We're now leaning towards the following solution at the CDR end:

When a major revision that changes the structure of an English summary occurs, the CDR editors will take the following steps:

1. Inform the Spanish translators that the English is ready to
translate.

2. Edit the Spanish version, adding an attribute to the
TranslationOf element in something like the following way:

<TranslationOf synchronized='N'>CDR0000012345</TranslationOf>

3. Make a new publishable version of the English.

4. Make a new publishable version of the Spanish on the same
day.

When synchronization is complete (the Spanish version is up to date with the English), then the CDR editors remove the
attribute:

synchronized='N'

by removing it or changing it to synchronized='Y', and making a new publishable version of the Spanish.

Doing it this way means that all changes signaling the unsynchronization are in one document only and, I would think, it accords well with the Percussion software that only needs to process one document to learn about translation relationships - though there would have to be new cancer.gov programming somewhere to handle section to section synchronized linking and section to document unsynchronized linking.

This needs further discussion. In the examples above, the TranslationOf element is given a CDR document ID without a fragment identifier, but if the element exists in order to identify a section of another document, it's unclear how that section will be found. Can we get more detailed information about how the toggling will work on cancer.gov?

Erika,

My recollection from our discussions about this way back in April 2012 was that the toggling would be done based on the fact that there is always a 1:1 correlation between and English summary section and a Spanish summary section except when the document is being revised, which is when the attribute would come into play. So Cancer.gov would essentially "match" section 1 English with section 1 Spanish, etc. and create the toggle. Bob, Alan, do I have this right?

Should I go ahead and add the attribute, or should I put this issue on hold while coordination with the WCMS team is worked out?

Entered on Margaret's behalf:

Please hold off on adding this attribute. There isn’t any reason to do this unless we know it is going to be in the cancer.gov release.

Margaret indicated in this afternoon's meeting that she's almost certain this will be in the next WCMS release. Should we still hold off?

I am still waiting to get a definitive answer. I realized that the new designs could just be referring to the same toggle function that we have now to go from the English home page to the Spanish home page. So, let's hold off.

Held meeting on 9/23 with Margaret Backwith, Robin Juthe, Bob Kline, Alan Meyer, Erika Cheng, Bryan Pizzillo and Lynn Cheryan to discuss the business requirements and possible design solutions.

MEETING NOTES:
Currently if a user is looking at a section of a summary in English and then click on Spanish, it will always take you to the first section in Spanish rather than the corresponding section. The desired interaction is to always take the user to the equivalent section when flipping between English and Spanish.

For example:
1. Go to URL http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/breast-cancer-and-pregnancy/Patient/page4 and notice that you are on the Recurrent Breast Cancer section (page 4)
2. Click on the "En espanol" tab
3. Notice that it takes you to the top section "Informacion general sobre el cancer de mama en el embarazo" (URL http://www.cancer.gov/espanol/pdq/tratamiento/cancer-de-seno-y-_embarazo/Patient)

The desired interaction is that clicking on the "En expanol" tab would take the user to the "Cancer de mama recidivante" section (URL http://www.cancer.gov/espanol/pdq/tratamiento/cancer-de-seno-y-embarazo/Patient/page4 --notice this is also page 4)

SOLUTIONS DISCUSSED
The group discussed various solutions, the most prominent being the following:
1 - Indicate in CDR the corresponding pages. This is not feasible due to the amount of resources it would take to manage the links.
2 - Add a TranslationOf attribute to indicate when the Spanish and English sections are not in synch (see design details captured in previous comments). This would mean that the interaction changes depending on new attribute. If in synch then the user would be brought to the corresponding section; if not in synch then go to the top section. Lynn felt this would not acheive the goal of improving the interaction.
3 - Keep the English and Spanish summaries in synch. This way no development would be needed on CDR and Percussion can more easily (compared to the other options) create logic to assume that the page/sections are always in synch and link the sections accordingly. This would mean that even though updates to the English summary is ready, it must wait until the Spanish version is also ready before publishing. At worse, the English summary would have to wait a few weeks for the Spanish version to be ready; this should be okay. Note that this is only for those summaries that are being restructured. If a change is kept within a section, then it okay to publish the English before the Spanish change is ready.

Option 3 seems to be the best solution given the level of effort as well as uncertainty around how much the Evolution project may change the way this information is presented on the cancer.gov website.

ACTION ITEMS
a. Margaret will follow up with her team to see if Option 3 is feasible.
b. Erika will take this task out of CDR Release 3.1 since if we go with Option 3 there will be no change, and we do not know enough about how Evolution will impact how the information is presented to go with Option 2.

I believe you've captured the discussions faithfully, Erika. Well done!

Margaret:

We've been skipping over this ticket in the status meetings, because it's marked with the cancer.gov tag, but I think the next action item was for you to follow up to determine if option #3 above is feasible.

According to earlier discussions on this topic, we should put this into the deep freeze until the WCMS team figures out what the requirements are.

This no longer aligns with CG, given the changes introduced for summaries in NVCG.