Checking results Mark as Unhandled

lraimo

What should Mark as Unhandled to and how should I use it?

I would see use cases when Unhandled would have own symbol.

Matti

Unvisited (Unhandled) issues are with Bold font.
Visited (Handled) issues are with normal font.
Mark as Unhandled makes the issue Unvisited.

This option is could be more clearly named.

Alex.J

@Matti-Kannala

A “wait for later” or “standby” option would be great (e.g. with an hour glass icon). I would use this when I know this needs to be checked but doesn’t need to be adressed immediately. Currently I would reject it without comment, but this makes it more difficult to distinguish from other rejected, uncommented issues that I get when I know the problem has been addressed more generally in a previous comment.
The shortcut A is the worst. Every once in a while, I accept all issues just because I selected it with Ctrl+A and pressed it half a second too long. Goos luck sorting it out afterward.

lraimo

Standby would be create. It should have an icon here as well

I think even two new options would be great to add flexibility

lraimo

Second options should be “Input Needed”. This option is reserved for situations where I require feedback or opinions from others to determine whether it is a real issue. I would like to include additional notes specifying from whom I need feedback. It should also support filtering based on these notes."

Alex.J

@lraimo said in Checking results Mark as Unhandled:

I require feedback or opinions from others to determine whether it is a real issue. I would like to include additional notes specifying from whom I need feedback.

I’d argue that this should just be a comment assigned to the person in question… Who can then close the comment or forward it depending on their opinion.

lraimo

@Solibrians
Any plans of adding those features?

Pasi Paasiala

How about filtering with status? This would give you a possibility to have any option you want? Adding hard-coded options to the list doesn’t sound like a good idea, since the list might never end.

Alex.J

@Pasi-Paasiala
Trying to ignore the interface and just looking at the user process:

either the rule result is recognized as something that can be ignored and should be ignored for the rest of the project (false positive or maybe something tolerated ; btw this would be perfect to implement some machine learning in rules…)
or the rule result is recognized as an error. In this case
- we might want to comment it immediately => create a slide
- or let it be for the time being and come back to it in a later iteration of the checking. However, in this case, two things are needed : during my checking, I need to keep the overview that I have already analyzed this result (hence the wish for a specific icon and a filter for “undefined”). And furthermore, I want to be able to distinguish between both cases (already commented or not) during my next checking.

If you go for user defined status, would that mean that the “accepted” and “rejected” status disappear, as well as the related sums in the result summary? I like the proposal for filtering, but for reporting we would need some structured way of exporting the data, and of course to keep an overview of the sum of results per status.

Btw, the reporting would be most useful if you could distinguish the comment count from the result count.

Generally speaking, I think that more flexibility for the user and more consistency between rule results, presentations and BCF live connectore is the way to go!

lraimo

@Pasi-Paasiala Any plans of adding this features. It should be quite easy to add but would add a lot of functionality

Alex.J

I think about it almost every day I work with Solibri. I just want to be able to set aside the result for the current checking iteration but mark it in a way that I will pass over it easily in the future, during another checking iteration.