You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The feedback title is mostly unused, maybe we should remove it. Usually we generate a feedback description and the title is then derived from the kind of feedback:
I.e. for referenced feedback it is something like File ... at line x to y for programming exercises, but this could be derived from the reference fields. For unreferenced feedback it might always just be Feedback.
I guess it would make sense to have a title describing the feedback as kind of a summary:
I.e. Grammar mistake, Syntax error, Wording, Best practices, ...
But then we have to document this somehow that this is how the feedback title should be used and we have to fill it out properly.
References
@pal03377 should I also drop the feedback.title from the schema? We are not really using it 🤔
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
FelixTJDietrich
changed the title
Removing feedback title
Removing feedback title or documenting its purpose
Jul 24, 2023
FelixTJDietrich
changed the title
Removing feedback title or documenting its purpose
Discussion: Removing feedback title or documenting its purpose
Jul 24, 2023
The feedback title is mostly unused, maybe we should remove it. Usually we generate a feedback description and the title is then derived from the kind of feedback:
I.e. for referenced feedback it is something like
File ... at line x to y
for programming exercises, but this could be derived from the reference fields. For unreferenced feedback it might always just beFeedback
.I guess it would make sense to have a title describing the feedback as kind of a summary:
I.e.
Grammar mistake
,Syntax error
,Wording
,Best practices
, ...But then we have to document this somehow that this is how the feedback title should be used and we have to fill it out properly.
References
Let's discuss this separately from this PR
Originally posted by @pal03377 in #56 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: