The list of the forms available in our main project is quite long and some colleagues would like to get the most used at the top of the list.
For the moment forms can be sorted (asc and desc) by date or name.
Would it by possible to add a sort by for example the number of submission for each form
In the screen below(wich is in fact just an example with only one form ?
Not an answer to your question, but a hack that works well for us:
You can create shortcuts to individual forms (actually, form versions) on the homescreen through the ODK 1x1 widget. We use this to lay out a flow chart of forms in the order they are expected to be filled.
The caveat is that these shortcuts link to specific form versions, so after each form version update you'll need to replace that shortcut on each device.
Thanks Florian !
I did not think about it.
Version number will probably be a problem during the field season...
But it is a first solution I will show to my colleagues.
Thanks for bringing this up, @mathieubossaert, I agree there are some straightforward improvements we could make here.
Here are some ideas related to what you've described:
Most submissions first: we'd look at submission count and sort by that. Helps with one kind of common usage pattern: fill out a subset of forms often and others rarely for special cases.
Last submitted to first we'd look at submission times and sort by that. Captures another kind of common usage pattern: first one form is filled out a bunch, then a different one is filled out a bunch.
Last opened first: we'd keep track of when each form is opened and sort by that. The disadvantage is that there might be lots of movement if someone is just trying to remember what form definitions they have on their device.
Can you please describe your usage pattern for the many forms in a bit more detail? Same question to you, @Raj_Pravat, since you've voted for this.
My sense is that the reverse sort is not necessary for these. That is, the least used forms end up at the bottom and when you want to access those you can scroll. What do you think?
Thank you Hélène for your detailed ideas and implications,
The last form submitted first should meet our needs. In a list of 10/15 forms, with the exception of our "general" form, the specific protocols and surveys focus on a specific part of the field season, depending on the phenology of the species or habitats.
Therefore, it makes sense to keep the last form submitted at the top of the list.
For example, March is dedicated to the bird survey : the bird form will remain at the top, next to my general form that I always use for non-protocol observations.
In April, I need to conduct a plant survey, the "plant" form will replace the "bird" form I submitted during my first field session.
I will still have my "favorite" form on hand.
And reverse sorting is not necessary. If I need to fill out a form that is not at the top of the list (for example, a form dedicated to the end of the field season), I will probably sort alphabetically or scroll the list to find it the first time.
The team has discussed this concept and we're proposing to add a single new sort option labeled "Last saved first". We're not exactly sure when we'll get a chance to work on this but would like to have a specification ready.
We're proposing "saved" instead of "sent" because it better captures real activity in an offline context. Additionally, we're proposing “Last saved first” instead of “Date saved, latest first” because we know that in some languages the latter would be very long (e.g. in French).
- The icon for “Last saved first” is the same as the icon used in Edit Saved Form for forms that are saved but not finalized
- When “Last saved first” is tapped, the list of form definitions reorders by save datetime including finalized and non-finalized filled forms
- When the sort order is “Last saved first”, the detailed form definition status line says “Last saved on ” (instead of “Added on ” from the form status column)
Note that sort order is not (currently) saved in a way that is shareable between devices so each device would need to be manually configured.
Looking forward to feedback!