...
Question | Answer | Date |
|---|---|---|
What migrations - caused by changing existing expense types - need to take place? | As of , only “pesticide” → “Pest control” Duncan Brain. |
|
Does it make sense for custom expense types to be at the end? Should they be elsewhere? | No - include them in alphabetical order. | ; reiterated |
How do we make types both short and crisp and descriptive? | Make the short descriptions searchable such that if someone searches for “lease” it brings up “Land” and “Machinery” since both of those might have the idea of a lease embedded within them. |
|
Is alphabetical sorting the best ordering for expense types? | Yes, we will use alphabetical sorting and custom expense types will be embedded along with standard expense types. |
|
With 13 default types, it feels like we’re right on the edge of tiles being a useful tool. Do we need to rethink the selection process / flow? | Include a search bar. Remove or reduce icons role and move to list view rather than tile view. Loic Sans thinks he can also support longer titles on a list view as needed. |
|
Should the UI for selecting revenues be updated to be consistent with the expenses UI? | Not for V1.5. Reasoning: Expenses are a batch selection process and revenues are not. Revenues will stay consistent with task tiles (which are also single selection) for now. |
|
It’s often difficult to disentangle whether something is purely labour, purely machinery rental, or a combination of both. Do we need to be able to answer this or is it sufficient to allow the user to select one or both? | Guidance for user onboarding and support 👇
|
|
Is there a way to make “Services” more useful of a type? Examples from the data include:
| Short description helps with this. Will re-evaluate a few months post-release. |
|
...