Topics

Improvement coming: Tiered percentage display in BadgeApp projects display

David A. Wheeler
 

FYI: Up to now the best practices badge’s multi-project display hasn’t clearly shown progress beyond “passing” until the project actually gets silver or gold.  It’s also been hard to search or sort on (e.g., “who got silver” or “who is at least 50% towards silver”)?  That’s unfortunate, because a number of projects have been making steady progress towards silver and gold.  We don’t expect *all* projects to get those levels, but it’d be nice to find out who is.  So we’re making a tweak to make this information easier to see and sort on.

 

To solve this, we’re switching the multi-project display so that it will display a “tiered percentage”.  In a tiered percentage 100% is passing, 200% is silver, and 300% is gold, and you then add the percentage points towards the next-highest badge you DON’T have.  For example, Zephyr has completed passing, and is 93% to silver, so its tiered percentage will show as “193%”.  I don’t know of anywhere else with this kind of measurement, but I think that provides a nice *short* but *useful* status display, and it *seems* relatively intuitive.  The corresponding JSON data about projects (provided by our REST interface) will also provide this info.

We haven’t deployed it in production, but you can see what it looks like here:

  https://master.bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/en/projects?sort=tiered_percentage&sort_direction=desc

 

As always, comments/feedback welcome!

 

--- David A. Wheeler

 

Daniel Stenberg
 

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, David A. Wheeler wrote:

For example, Zephyr has completed passing, and is 93% to silver, so its tiered percentage will show as "193%". I don't know of anywhere else with this kind of measurement, but I think that provides a nice *short* but *useful* status display, and it *seems* relatively intuitive.
But if Zephyr is *also* at the same time 93% of the gold criteria it will still only show 193%, right? That might not be as intuitive...

I'm not objecting, just clarifying I guess.

--

/ daniel.haxx.se

David A. Wheeler
 

David A. Wheeler:
For example, Zephyr has completed passing, and is 93% to silver, so its
tiered percentage will show as "193%". I don't know of anywhere else with
this kind of measurement, but I think that provides a nice *short* but
*useful* status display, and it *seems* relatively intuitive.

Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel@...]:
But if Zephyr is *also* at the same time 93% of the gold criteria it will
still only show 193%, right? That might not be as intuitive...
I'm not objecting, just clarifying I guess.
You're absolutely correct, but I think it's okay.

It's theoretically *possible* for a project to have a higher percentage in gold than in silver, but it's very unlikely. The gold criteria are generally harder than silver, and the silver criteria are harder than passing. In addition, there's overlap (some "SUGGESTED" or "SHOULD" at lower levels become "MUST" at higher levels).

In addition, to get a higher-level badge you must meet the lower-level badge criteria, so this "capping" maps well to final badges. For example, a "193%" correctly suggests that the project is very, very close to earning silver (200%). A more general "average" could muddle things.

Of course, getting a *passing* badge is a significant achievement, and we don't want to take away from that. We just want to make it easier for people to quickly get more information than they could before.

--- David A. Wheeler

Georg Link
 

The percentages as proposed are logical.

Could we, instead of going above 100% (more than the whole), display current level plus percentage of next level?

Here are examples with interpretation:
* 95% (= 5% away from passing)
* passing + 80% (= 20% away from silver)
* silver + 30% (= 70% away from gold)
* gold (= achieved mastery)

In the background, we could still filter and sort based on the percentages that exceed the whole.

Georg


Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel@...]:
> But if Zephyr is *also* at the same time 93% of the gold criteria it will
> still only show 193%, right? That might not be as intuitive...
> I'm not objecting, just clarifying I guess.

You're absolutely correct, but I think it's okay.

It's theoretically *possible* for a project to have a higher percentage in gold than in silver, but it's very unlikely.  The gold criteria are generally harder than silver, and the silver criteria are harder than passing.  In addition, there's overlap (some "SUGGESTED" or "SHOULD" at lower levels become "MUST" at higher levels).

In addition, to get a higher-level badge you must meet the lower-level badge criteria, so this "capping" maps well to final badges.  For example, a "193%" correctly suggests that the project is very, very close to earning silver (200%).  A more general "average" could muddle things.

Of course, getting a *passing* badge is a significant achievement, and we don't want to take away from that.  We just want to make it easier for people to quickly get more information than they could before.

David A. Wheeler
 

We certainly *could* display them that way, but there’s a lack of horizontal space.  The projects table is already really wide.  Besides, if you just want to see in progress/passing/silver/gold, we *also* show the badge icon (which does the same thing).

 

--- David A. Wheeler

 

From: Georg Link [mailto:linkgeorg@...]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 11:45 AM
To: Wheeler, David A
Cc: Daniel Stenberg; cii-badges@...
Subject: Re: [CII-badges] Improvement coming: Tiered percentage display in BadgeApp projects display

 

The percentages as proposed are logical.

 

Could we, instead of going above 100% (more than the whole), display current level plus percentage of next level?

 

Here are examples with interpretation:

* 95% (= 5% away from passing)

* passing + 80% (= 20% away from silver)

* silver + 30% (= 70% away from gold)

* gold (= achieved mastery)

 

In the background, we could still filter and sort based on the percentages that exceed the whole.

 

Georg

 


Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel@...]:
> But if Zephyr is *also* at the same time 93% of the gold criteria it will
> still only show 193%, right? That might not be as intuitive...
> I'm not objecting, just clarifying I guess.

You're absolutely correct, but I think it's okay.

It's theoretically *possible* for a project to have a higher percentage in gold than in silver, but it's very unlikely.  The gold criteria are generally harder than silver, and the silver criteria are harder than passing.  In addition, there's overlap (some "SUGGESTED" or "SHOULD" at lower levels become "MUST" at higher levels).

In addition, to get a higher-level badge you must meet the lower-level badge criteria, so this "capping" maps well to final badges.  For example, a "193%" correctly suggests that the project is very, very close to earning silver (200%).  A more general "average" could muddle things.

Of course, getting a *passing* badge is a significant achievement, and we don't want to take away from that.  We just want to make it easier for people to quickly get more information than they could before.

 

Georg Link
 

That makes sense. How about displaying the percentage and clarifying what it means in a mouse-over tooltip?


Georg

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Wheeler, David A <dwheeler@...> wrote:

We certainly *could* display them that way, but there’s a lack of horizontal space.  The projects table is already really wide.  Besides, if you just want to see in progress/passing/silver/gold, we *also* show the badge icon (which does the same thing).

 

--- David A. Wheeler

 

From: Georg Link [mailto:linkgeorg@...]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 11:45 AM
To: Wheeler, David A
Cc: Daniel Stenberg; cii-badges@lists.coreinfrastructure.org
Subject: Re: [CII-badges] Improvement coming: Tiered percentage display in BadgeApp projects display

 

The percentages as proposed are logical.

 

Could we, instead of going above 100% (more than the whole), display current level plus percentage of next level?

 

Here are examples with interpretation:

* 95% (= 5% away from passing)

* passing + 80% (= 20% away from silver)

* silver + 30% (= 70% away from gold)

* gold (= achieved mastery)

 

In the background, we could still filter and sort based on the percentages that exceed the whole.

 

Georg

 


Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel@...]:
> But if Zephyr is *also* at the same time 93% of the gold criteria it will
> still only show 193%, right? That might not be as intuitive...
> I'm not objecting, just clarifying I guess.

You're absolutely correct, but I think it's okay.

It's theoretically *possible* for a project to have a higher percentage in gold than in silver, but it's very unlikely.  The gold criteria are generally harder than silver, and the silver criteria are harder than passing.  In addition, there's overlap (some "SUGGESTED" or "SHOULD" at lower levels become "MUST" at higher levels).

In addition, to get a higher-level badge you must meet the lower-level badge criteria, so this "capping" maps well to final badges.  For example, a "193%" correctly suggests that the project is very, very close to earning silver (200%).  A more general "average" could muddle things.

Of course, getting a *passing* badge is a significant achievement, and we don't want to take away from that.  We just want to make it easier for people to quickly get more information than they could before.

 


David A. Wheeler
 

Georg Link [mailto:linkgeorg@...]:

That makes sense. How about displaying the percentage and clarifying what it means in a mouse-over tooltip?
I certainly agree we need to explain it!

The way I *currently* resolved that was that I added following to the /projects page, just below the table:
The "tiered %" field shows 300% for gold, 200% for silver, and 100% for passing, and adds progress after the highest-earned badge.
I'm hoping someone will soon translate that text into German :-). Our French translator already got it done! (Hat-tip).

I didn't make that text a tooltip, because on smartphones tooltips on hyperlinks aren't obvious and they're tricky to activate (and this is a live hyperlink, since it lets you sort on the column). We could *also* make it a tooltip, for the laptop/desktop users, where that isn't a problem.

--- David A. Wheeler

Georg Link
 



On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Wheeler, David A <dwheeler@...> wrote:
Georg Link [mailto:linkgeorg@...]:


The way I *currently* resolved that was that I added following to the /projects page, just below the table:
> The "tiered %" field shows 300% for gold, 200% for silver, and 100% for passing, and adds progress after the highest-earned badge.

I didn't make that text a tooltip, because on smartphones tooltips on hyperlinks aren't obvious and they're tricky to activate (and this is a live hyperlink, since it lets you sort on the column).  We could *also* make it a tooltip, for the laptop/desktop users, where that isn't a problem.

I was thinking of a tooltip for each of the percentages, not on the table title. When you hover over the value 250% the tooltip would show "silver + 50% towards gold".

 
I'm hoping someone will soon translate that text into German :-).  Our French translator already got it done! (Hat-tip).

Mockery! -- Maybe it worked and there is a German translation now :-)

David A. Wheeler
 

Georg Link [mailto:linkgeorg@...]:
I was thinking of a tooltip for each of the percentages, not on the table title. When you hover over the value 250% the tooltip would show "silver + 50% towards gold".
Oh, I see! Good idea. I added that as an issue:
https://github.com/coreinfrastructure/best-practices-badge/issues/1172

David A. Wheeler:
I'm hoping someone will soon translate that text into German :-).  Our French translator already got it done! (Hat-tip).
Georg Link:
Mockery! -- Maybe it worked and there is a German translation now :-)
I meant it as a good-natured challenge, but as long as the system works... :-).

--- David A. Wheeler