# uc-0002: Use Case Testing form:

**Reviewer**: Saranya Canchi
**OS (including version)**: macOS Big Sur v11.2.1
**Browser (including version)**: Safari v14.0.3
**Use case**: [uc-0002](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/uc-0002/)
**Review type**: <manual or Selenium> manual
**Review Date**: 02/16/2021
**Role groups**: Groups entry is blank

<details><summary>Instructions</summary>
<p>
I would like each use case checked by at least two people. Preferably with a mix of browsers and OS, so that we have a better chance of spotting potential bugs.

1. Choose a use case that you will validate
2. Copy the text from the next comment into a new document
3. Follow the use case, filling out the document as you go
4. If you encounter one of the Quick Tests, check that it is right and check it off. If you don't encounter it as part of your use case, leave it blank. If it doesn't work, add some text explaining the problem
5. When you are done with your use case, post your filled form as a comment in this thread

I recommend starting by looking at the Quick Tests section and seeing which ones will be part of your use case so you can check them as you go instead of backtracking at the end
</p>
</details>

## Use Case Description

**1. Evaluate the description.**

- Does this description make sense?

- Yes, however I would replace matrices with tables since in the strictest sense matrices contain numbers while the user gets a table with string and numbers from the portal.

- Does it sound like a useful thing to do?
- Yes

- Are there any corrections that should be made (spelling, grammar, etc)?
- None

**2. Try to complete the steps as they are described for the persona in the use case.**

<details><summary>Instructions</summary>
<p>
For each step record:
- the specific action you took, for e.g. I clicked on 'leg' in the 'anatomy' filter at [this web address]()
- Whether that action was possible/worked
- Whether the *results* of that action are as described
- and if they are not as described, how they differ
- Any other comments you have, or things you were surprised about. Be specific!

Copy the lines below as many times as needed for your use case
</p>
</details>

---
Action: **[t-0017](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0017/)** - access staging portal website: https://app-staging.nih-cfde.org and sign in using the Log In option
- [x] Worked
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments
Saw a new permission page stating what access NIH CFDE would like which I have not encountered in my previous sign in using ORCID.
---
Action: **[t-0011](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0011/)**
Includes:
**[t-0010](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0010/)** --> Don't know if the summary table is the same as the filtered table you get as you update the choices on portal
**[t-0003](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0003/)**

I had some trouble deciding which facet to use since you don't get the required columns across all the different filtered searched. I did:

1. **Browse All Data --> Biosample**
- contains 656,285 records and has the ID Namespace (CF Program name) as well as the Anatomy as columns
2. **Anatomy --> All records with value**
- This results in 506,150 matching results
3. **Common Fund Program --> Show More**

- Did not open this window. I wanted to view all the unique programs to which the data was mapped.
- Clicking OK redirects the user back to the home page. Is that required behavior ?

4. **Export --> Search results (CSV)**
- This worked but it was a large file (> 150 MB).

- [ ] Worked
- [x] Did not Work
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
(see above)
- Other Comments

- The ID Namespace in the portal has the short human readable name but the manifest has the GUID as value in this column. Can the manifest have both the values ?


- The anatomy column has the name as value in portal while the manifest has the UBERON IDs. It would be helpful to have an additional column with the UBERONID name value as well to know which tissue is which ID.

> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]This is an instance where what I really need is a full description of what a user wants the manifest to have in it. That might be a good thing for the team to do jointly.
:::info
Agree that the content of the manifest columns can be discussed as a team. I would atleast replicate the columns as they appear in the portal in addition to adding more columns. Right now the columns contents for a given column headers are replaced in the manifest which is not optimal.
:::
- In the downloaded manifest, if not required, the identifer columns (starting with R) can be removed.
---
Action: **[t-0012](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0012/)**
Includes:
**[t-0010](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0010/)** --> Don't know if the summary table is the same as the filtered table you get as you update the choices on portal
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]I don't know what this means
**[t-0003](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0003/)**

I almost missed this because there is no way to know there are additional columns that you can view by resizing the browser window. Even after expanding to the full extent of my screen, there are still some columns that I cannot view. **It is necessary to have either a scrollbar at the bottom or indicate that there are more columns to view.** This is what I did:
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]There are scroll bars, you just have them shut off. This is a setting in your personal browser, not the portal. You have to tell your browser you want to see them.

:::info
I have enabled the scroll behavior for the browser. But this seems to me like a portal UX behavior. The screenshots capture the issue. The top screenshot shows the File facet view of the data with the column headers. Note the side scroll bar indicates that there is data on the bottom. But there is no scroll bar visible at the bottom of the page to indicate there are more columns on the right. The second screenshot is all the way at the bottom of the page in the same window resolution which shows the bottom scroll bar but now the column names are cut off. What would be useful is to have the a scroll bar above the table or a dynmaic scroll at the bottom of the page that the user can use to scroll to the end of the table or for for all the columns to dynamically resize based on the browser window.

**File view with column header**

**File view with scroll bar**

:::

1. **Browse All Data --> File**
- contains 375,288 records and has the ID Namespace (CF Program name) as well as the Assay Type as columns
2. **Assay Type --> All records with value**
- This results in 365,887 matching results
3. **Common Fund Program --> Show More**
- This worked and there is information from 7 CF programs.

4. **Export --> Search results (CSV)**
- This worked but it was a large file (~ 150 MB).


- [ ] Worked
- [x] Did not Work
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments
- Same issues as those listed for t-0011. The id_namespace value in manifest is the GUID and not the name for the program.
- The Assay type maps to the OBI ID and would be useful to have the name of the assay as a column as well.
---
Action: **[t-0020](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0020/)**
Includes:
**[t-0010](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0010/)** --> Don't know if the summary table is the same as the filtered table you get as you update the choices on portal
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]I don't know what this means
**[t-0003](https://use-cases.nih-cfde.org/t-0003/)**

This is what I did:

1. **Browse All Data --> Subject**
- contains 18,653 records and has the ID Namespace (CF Program name) as well as the Taxonomy as columns
2. **Taxonomy --> All records with value**
- This results in 16,993 matching results
3. **Common Fund Program --> Show More**
- This worked and there is information from 6 CF programs.

4. **Export --> Search results (CSV)**

- [ ] Worked
- [x] Did not Work
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments
- Same issues as those listed for t-0011, t-0012. The id_namespace value in manifest is the GUID and not the name for the program.
- There is **no taxonomy column** in the downloaded manifest file! Only granularity exists.



---

## Tasks for this use case:

1. Based on the description you walked through, does this list of tasks make sense? If not, why not? Are there missing tasks? Unused tasks? Task descriptions that don't quite match the workflow? Be specific both about which tasks and their specific problems.
- I would relist the order of the tasks such that t-0003 and t-0010 are at the bottom since they deal with ouputs of the query.
- Don't understand the necessity for t-0010. Search/filter tasks already

2. Check whether each general task works, regardless of whether the specific instance described in the description works.

<details><summary>Instructions</summary>
<p>
For each task record:
- the specific action you took, for e.g. I clicked on 'leg' in the 'anatomy' filter at [this web address]()
- note that tasks are generally broader than the description, so you likely will need to do more than one action to test it
- Whether that action was possible/worked, i.e. was it technically possible to do?
- Whether the *results* of that action are what you expect, i.e. did it 'work' in the way a user would want
- and if they are not as described, how they differ
Copy the lines below as many times as needed for your use case
</p>
</details>

Action:
- [ ] Worked
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments

Action:
- [ ] Worked
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments

## Requirements for this use case:

1. Based on the description you walked through and it's tasks, does this list of requirements make sense? If not, why not? Are there things you needed but are not listed as requirements? Unused requirements? Requirement descriptions that don't quite match the workflow? Be specific both about which requirements and their specific problems.

- Don't understand the distinction between r-00004 and r-00005 types.

2. Check whether each requirement works, if possible, regardless of whether the specific instance described in the description works.

<details><summary>Instructions</summary>
<p>
For each requirement record:

- the specific action you took, for e.g. I clicked on 'leg' in the 'anatomy' filter at [this web address]()
- note that requirements are very broad, so you may need to do more than one action to test it
- if you can't find a way to test the requirement, record that and why
- Whether that action was possible/worked, i.e. was it technically possible to do?
- Whether the *results* of that action are what you expect, i.e. did it 'work' in the way a user would want
- and if they are not as described, how they differ

</p>
</details>

Action:
- [ ] Was not testable
- [ ] Worked
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments

Action:
- [ ] Was not testable
- [ ] Worked
- [ ] Results as expected
- If not, why not:
- Other Comments

# Overall

What difficulties did you encounter while completing your use case?

- I assumed the persona of this use case would not spend additional time trying to data wrangle to obtain the table/plots. The data from the manifest in its current form is impossible to use for the intended purpose without additional data manipulation. The different facet views and the variations in the downloaded manifest only lead to more confusion.

Did you see any spelling, grammar or similar mistakes on any resource you visited in completing your use case?

- No

What other comments or questions do you have about your use case?

- This seemed more involved than it is currently worded in the use case. Maybe in the future it will be a few clicks to get the data. The persona could have also used the summary plots from the home page for the report and can be a separate task in itself.

What other comments or questions do you have about any of the resources you visited?

- Scope for improvement in portal aesthetics (see comments above)
- Facets with large record set were slow to load
- ~~The URL maxed out of characters when all the UBERON values were selcted in Biosample and I tried to add "No value" to the selection~~. --->
:::info
Tested it again, but worked without an error
:::
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]I don't know what this means

What feedback do you have about this form/testing process?

- It is not a quick process. Might be easier to do a video recording with commentary of the process.
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]I would be fine with you guys making videos for your own use and cutting out snippets. For some things little video snippets would be easier to show the problem with even, but there's no chance I would have time to sit and watch whole videos to write bug tickets, and there's no chance the tech team would watch whole videos to see your errors. You'd still have to write notes for us to work from.
:::info
We plan to make suggestions and come with alternative testing form that would be relatively easy to fill and read. There is lot of functionality vs UX vs clarification information that can be separated out.
:::

# Quick Tests

Complete test if it is encountered as part of your use case.
- If test works/work is complete check the box.
- If you don't encounter the test during your use case, leave it blank
- If test does not work/work is not complete

Home page
- [x] Download button style now matches wireframe
- [x] chart in upper right corner reflects data
- There is a chart but the contents differ from the wireframe link.
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]How?
:::info
The wireframe has these titles:

- Data sets
- Projects
- Files
- Storage Volume

They are slightly different from the currently shown titles which are:

- Total Subjects
- Total Biosamples
- Total Files
- Total Projects
:::
- There is lock icon next to Dashboard tab in top nav bar
- The Data Review tab is in a different color and there is no space between the lock icon and hearder name

- [x] Color Palette is updated

Dashboard
- [x] "Select Data view" box present to show which dashboard graphs are available
- why is there three dots after the "Select Data View" ?
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]I don't know what you're talking about here
:::info
Notice the three dots in the "Select Data View" title.
:::
- [x] Download button style now matches wireframe
- [ ] Timestamp for data missing
- don't know what this means but the timestamp persisted similar to the wireframe doc.

DCC Review
- [ ] Numbers have links
- [ ] Scroll bar in Data Review table

Registry
- [ ] [Spelling correct](https://github.com/nih-cfde/cfde-deriva/issues/131)

Navbar
- [ ] Bolded option in navbar when page is selected
- didn't work for me
> [name=Amanda Charbonneau]What didn't work for you???
:::info
None of the options in the navbar were bolded after selection. For example Dashboard is not bold when on the Dashboard page:
:::
- [ ] Log out button styles
- have a drop down menu next to my name with log out option
- [ ] Locks next to Dashboard and Data Review links missing
- Persisted lock next to Data Review tab
- [x] Color Palette

[Link to QA screens for reference](https://drive.google.com/file/d/11-SVyGzTsKy5Ke8o6s_lFE6LCF_BrJ2a/view)