ziebart Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 To be fair the paper clipboard was pretty easy yet people were always afraid of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whbecker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 The same could be done for the time. It is rare that you would have a USPSA handgun stage take more than 100 seconds, if a time is input beyond 100 seconds a pop up could ask "Are you sure the stage time exceeds 100 seconds?". I have revolver and new shooters that sometime exceed the 100 second time. Then make the magic number 200 seconds before it does the pop up..... The point I am trying to make is that today you could have someone input a time of 202.4 instead of 20.24 and it would accept the incorrect time without posting a notice. If the shooter or score keeper does not look at the time or hit factor and notice that its abnormal then that shooter will end up with an incorrect score. How about jPractiscore assuming 2 deciaml places and not entering the decimal place at all. It would require entering the 20 seconds as 2000, but I thibk it would be less error prone than entering the decimal. Maybe make it an option. Wayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) There is no need for the Disqualify or DNF Buttons to be on the "RO" level scoring page. Both the DQ and DNF should rarely be needed when entering scores and shoud be on another page that has "administrator" type permissions. @ less buttons would simplify the page. Perhaps a long hold on Shooters name at the Squad Level Page would bring up a box with 3 options. Cancel, Disqualify or DNF. Bob Edited December 21, 2012 by Glock27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) How about jPractiscore assuming 2 deciaml places and not entering the decimal place at all. It would require entering the 20 seconds as 2000, but I thibk it would be less error prone than entering the decimal. Maybe make it an option. Wayne Brilliant and elegant solution. Fix the decimal at 2 places and then you'd just have to enter 4 or 5 numbers and not fumble to find the . ALL Comstock, Virginia Count and Time-Plus USPSA matches just record to 1/100. Being able to go.XXXXXXXXX is silly. IMHO Re-Tapping on the Time Box clears it. Bob Edited December 21, 2012 by Glock27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Tompkins Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 To be fair the paper clipboard was pretty easy yet people were always afraid of it. And it still had errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Tompkins Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 How about jPractiscore assuming 2 deciaml places and not entering the decimal place at all. It would require entering the 20 seconds as 2000, but I thibk it would be less error prone than entering the decimal. Maybe make it an option. Wayne I like this idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) If there is more than one page of Targets for a Stage, the 12th is cut off on NSTs. T#12 is half height. This will confuse the average end user! Bob Edited December 21, 2012 by Glock27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Nope, disagree, no reason not to display it. I gave you several reasons. IMHO it is distraction to score keeper, How? When you're recording scores, you're not even on that particular form. When you are on it, it's an additional indicator of who has shot and who hasn't, which makes selecting the next shooter that much easier. it should not be used as indication that scores has been entered Why? It certainly shows that you've been there. You've entered something. Therefore it does show that scores have been entered. If you're forgetting to put in the time, that's fixable by adjusting your practices. and finally most people can't see it anyways because font is not large enough. That can be fixed, if it's determined it needs fixing. I think it's a value-add. I wouldn't take it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euxx Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 How? When you're recording scores, you're not even on that particular form. When you are on it, it's an additional indicator of who has shot and who hasn't, which makes selecting the next shooter that much easier. Exactly. When you are not scoring, your task is to find the next shooter in the list and get ready to score him. So, additional clutter in the shooter list and questions from competitors "what was my hit factor on previous page" are distraction. The only indicator you practically need there if scores are complete or not (yes or no really). Everything else is just nice to have, but not really a necessity. it should not be used as indication that scores has been entered Why? It certainly shows that you've been there. You've entered something. Therefore it does show that scores have been entered. If you're forgetting to put in the time, that's fixable by adjusting your practices. A yes or no indicator will serve that better and does not require additional interpretation... and finally most people can't see it anyways because font is not large enough. That can be fixed, if it's determined it needs fixing. I think it's a value-add. I wouldn't take it out. Well, I don't think it can be. A) Increasing font will make list more cluttered and less readable for its original purpose of finding next competitor. With increased font, information on the second line doesn't fit on small screens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 euxx, Just a suggestion. It might be better if you listened to what the customer is asking for, instead of telling them why they don't need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euxx Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 sperman, if it wasn't obvious yet, opinions I am expressing here are my own and not those of the official practiscore team. If you want an official statement, please contact support@practiscore.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA-LEE Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Would it be possible to have multiple styles of page layout formats for the different types of devices? For example, have a cell phone size page layout, then a tablet size page layout. That way you could optimize the screens to the size of screen it will be used on? It just seems like we are worrying about making a universal page layout that will work well on both types of screens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euxx Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Would it be possible to have multiple styles of page layout formats for the different types of devices? For example, have a cell phone size page layout, then a tablet size page layout. That way you could optimize the screens to the size of screen it will be used on? It just seems like we are worrying about making a universal page layout that will work well on both types of screens. It is already done to some extent (e.g. squad number is shown on Nooks, but not on small phones, some forms are not showing promo banners on small phones, etc). But that complicates things quite a bit and personally I don't think it worth an effort. Besides, it is impossible to make everyone happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziebart Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Euxx You are right it is impossible to make everyone happy. I like the HF as is. If someone doesn't like it don't look at it. If as a score keeper you don't want people asking for their HF then don't tell them. But be prepared for them to ask for the review page so they can verify hits and time. It is their right to verify scores. I want to hear the HF as a competitor because then I know that all targets have been scored, there is a time, and that my score has been saved. We have serveral issues where scores were recorded on the wrong person or times not entered. This simple step fixes that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 PractiScore Version Numbers. On the Bug Tracker page when do the Resolved Status items go in the code? Is 1.0.14 static or would any changes trigger a different # (1.0.15)? Perhaps a note in the issues table would clarify that at a glance. We are reverting our NSTs to 1.0.12 so the T#s render. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euxx Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Any changes will always go into the next version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 That's what I figured, but there are 2 pages of issues there and I couldn't tell if maybe some of the resolved issues were in versions that were already released. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 ... We are reverting our NSTs to 1.0.12 so the T#s render. ... What issue is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) The Target # column doesn't render with 1.0,14 The T# Header is there but no target numbers. Bob Edited December 23, 2012 by Glock27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 I'll stay with 1.0.14 for now. We don't have a match until 1/6 and they'll hopefully have that cosmetic issue fixed by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark R Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 yep...just tested it on my android phone and T#'s are missing. I have until Jan 12, or I'll need to back up a version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euxx Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 I am working on 1.0.15 version. If target names are critical, I can put a maintenance release out. There are also issue in 1.0.14 on android with stage rankings for time plus matches. 1.0.15 (or one after) will change scoring workflow (e.g. review screen will be mandatory). There are few other smaller improvements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock27 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) I handed a couple of ROs a couple of our NSTs (with 1.0.14 and 1.0.12) today and they confirmed importance of target numbers. They were confused without them! Same stages and shooters... Bob Edited December 24, 2012 by Glock27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveT-NV Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 When entering scores I've noted that on Android Devices it tells you how many shooters have been scored on each stage, where there is nothing about this on my iPad. I apologize if this has been brought up before, hard looking through 30 pages of comments. Is this by design? if not it seems like a handy thing to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) Yeah, we need the target numbers back. At major matches, sometimes the match book has the targets labeled T1, T2, etc, and you can match those with the devices. And we need the HF's to stay in place on the squad lists. If you're worried about being able to find the shooters who haven't shot yet and the presence of a HF isn't enough of an indicator (I just DON'T understand this), maybe you can color-code the lines of those who haven't shot yet. And I'm curious. As features are added to the android side, are these changes being ported over to the iOS side as well? Edited December 24, 2012 by wgnoyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts