Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 20 Current »

Please review the following pages for glaring errors or omissions. Add your comments to this document by end of day Friday, September 13, 2024.

Remember this is a dev site so news content may not be up to date.

HOME/TOP NAVIGATION

https://access.qltddev.com/

  • Add comment here…

  • (Deems) Overall comment - this looks good!

  • (Deems) We’re “wasting” a lot of valuable space on the home page with the image and a single “Get Started” box. Can we shrink that and display the text below the image more prominently?

    • There’s also a lot of wasted space in the white box next to the NSF/ACCESS logos

    • Since there’s now a “News” button on the navigation bar, maybe we should scrap listing the news at the bottom of the page.

  • (Deems) the “Find Information for You” section shouldn’t be buried at the bottom. Consider moving this just below the first 2 paragraphs of text. complete

  • (Deems) the videos at the bottom have strikingly low views (under 200 for each). Can we put these in another place?

  • (Towns) perhaps be more direct… at no cost to you! complete

  • (Towns) in general agree with Stephen that we have a lot of white space. I prefer more compact pages, personally. I know this can hinder readability, but still seems to be more blank space that there should be.

  • (Towns) In numbered item 3, “EXPLORE ACCESS is a good place to start” should probably read “An ACCESS EXPLORE allocation is a good place to start.” An EXPLORE ACCESS allocation project type is a good place to start. complete within persona accordions and live site

  • (Towns) Under the “run and track” heading there is a typo: Pegasus is an easy to use workflow management tool managed from within a Jupyter Notebook. complete within persona accordions and live site

  • (Towns) Meta comment: I think we need to move away from using “supercomputing” and “HPC” as terms as much as possible. We are finding many who would benefit from these resources, do identify with the terms and think this is all for someone else. This is particularly true in new communities we are trying to engage and this tends to push them away.

  • (Knuth) Could we move up the persona links to be before the news highlights? complete

  • (Knuth) Can we put a link on the home page (ideally at the top) for people to submit tickets?

GET STARTED

Complete
Get Started page is removed. Get Started button on home page now goes to: https://allocations.access-ci.org/get-your-first-project

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/

  • (Deems) Meta Comment about Personas: Instead of “I’m a…” consider rephrasing to “For…” (e.g. “For Researchers”, “For Graduate Students”, “For Educators”

    • this would play off nicely with “ACCESS For…(insert persona)”

  • (Deems) The “What’s next?” section looks a little funky in boxes. Can we make these a list with drop-downs for more information?

    • I think my general comment is: “there’s a lot of info in this page, and we might be able to organize better.”

  • (Hart) It leads with a link to the About ACCESS FAQ page,

    • followed by a repeat (with a different look) of the persona links,

    • THEN, three steps to get started, PLUS six possible (unnumbered) followup actions (several with multiple links).

    • It feels like this page can't commit to what it wants to be or do.

    • Furthermore, much of the Get Started page and the About ACCESS page FAQ seem to primarily target Researchers. So the new For Researchers page seems to add another layer of uncertainty. Which page should Researchers *really* start with? 

    • The About ACCESS page could just be a standard text page, mainly with the answers to the first of the two questions there. The other questions should be moved to the most appropriate persona pages. So "About ACCESS" would no longer be an FAQ page.

    • For the Get Started page, I'd omit the boxes for the personas here. I'd also try to structure the page consistently as steps 1-6. Keep steps 1-3 but turn the "What's Next" boxes into steps 4-6 somehow.

  • (Towns) I have to say I ran into some of the same confusion.

    • Starting with the list of persona pages to start with confuses me as to whether I should go there, or scroll down to see how to “get started.”

    • Having the instructions on how to apply seems premature at this point since it is not clear what I should do given what my persona is-- meaning I want to go check those pages first.

    • Perhaps the structure should be that the Getting Started page points to general program information and then highlights the persona pages.

      • This moves the process step into a lower page. Even if they are replicated on each personal page, who cares?

      • Then in the Quick links list on each persona page, they go to the actual steps in the submission process. Those could all point to the same page, potentially, but might be better to replicate. Given this, perhaps a Getting Started page is not needed but this is done on the main page and flows to the persona pages and then on to the submission process.

  • (Knuth) Under “Upon Approval…” it might make sense to say “project allocation” rather than just “allocation”. If you’re new you might not make the connection that you can work on your project once you get your allocation, as is described earlier.

  • (Knuth) Under the Pegasus box, say “managed from within a Jupyter Notebook” instead.

  • (Knuth) I don’t think we should call it the “Support Ticketing System”. It should just be the “Ticketing System” or maybe the “ACCESS Ticketing System”. Note for all tracks

  • (Knuth) Please remove MATCH Premier - we’re eliminating that program. Note for all tracks

FOR RESEARCHERS

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/for-researchers/

  • (Deems) Considering adding “available through ACCESS” to the opening sentence: “Computational researchers of all experience levels use advanced computational resources available through ACCESS to take their research to the next level. complete

    • (Towns) This is an important point and we should actually never say “ACCESS resources” but “available via ACCESS” or “allocated by ACCESS” or similar. There are political sensitivities around this. Note for all tracks

  • (Hart - for all non-RP persona pages)Each starts with a "content-free" sentence, then pushes again the About ACCESS FAQ, all links to About ACCESS removed from personas, visitors can use the “About” link in the universal navigation…then a set of Quick Links, then — if you scroll far enough — a different set of FAQs. E.g., three handfuls of spaghetti hoping we'll get something that sticks. The Quick Links on each persona pages, should be turned into Qs for the FAQ lists, if they're not already there. So, just one FAQ list for each persona.

    • (Towns) I have to admit I am not fully following Dave here, but I think he is on to something….

  • (Towns) I am still struggling with how I get to the point of submission. It feels like I hit the Getting Started page, but I don't know the details for my persona, so I go there. Then I need to go back up to the Getting Started page to actually submit anything. Feels like the workflow of this should be written out and the appearance of information should support that workflow as efficiently as possible.

  • (Towns) It feels like the Quick links should follow the Questions….

  • (Knuth) I think this applies to all, but I feel like that’s an old Support webpage that’s being linked under the “Are Support Services Available” and the “ACCESS MATCH Services” Like. First, this should be called “ACCESS Support”, not “ACCESS Match” (we got rid of that name awhile ago). Second, this is the link to the Support page: https://support.access-ci.org/ . (It’s also possible that I’m out of date here too and this is the new page for Support? Might be good to ask Andrew - he’ll know more). Note for all tracks

  • (Knuth) similarly on that tab - do we want to link to CCMNet? It make it look like this project is part of ACCESS when it isn’t. I could see people getting confused and going there to ask for direct ACCESS support. It might be better under an “external orgs” section, should one exist somewhere. The question is Are support services available? so content can include non-ACCESS support like Campus Champions

FOR EDUCATORS

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/for-educators/

  • (Towns) Similar comments to above regarding order/structure/flow… complete

FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/for-graduate-students/

  • (Deems) Please remove this sentence: ; “NSF Graduate Fellows are eligible PIs for small-scale awards.”

    • We’ll be modifying this policy so that all graduate students are equal. complete Note for all tracks

  • (Towns) Similar comments to above regarding order/structure/flow…

FOR RESOURCE PROVIDERS

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/for-resource-providers/

  • (Deems) Insert links to the Integration Roadmaps documentation? complete

  • (Hart) I will add that "explore why become an RP" doesn't seem grammatically correct. And even nit-pickier, in the box at right, the apostrophe in "I'm a Resource Provider" is backwards.

    • (Towns) “…explore the [value OR advantages] in becoming an RP”

    • (Towns) good on the apostrophe catch.. I missed that complete

FOR PROGRAMS & ORGANIZATIONS

https://access.qltddev.com/get-started/for-programs-organizations/

  • (Deems) Insert quick link for “Promote your events and news…” with a link to the Support team’s functionality complete

  • (Deems) Remove “Eligibility” from the quick links. complete

BECOME A RESOURCE PROVIDER

https://access.qltddev.com/about/resource-providers/

  • (Deems) rephrase this → “the expertise of data experts” to “and their expertise” (not sure why it’s limited to “data experts”…) complete

  • (Deems) “What are the qualifications to become an RP?” is blank

    • I’m really interested in reading that section (smile)

  • (Deems) instead of “See which institutions and organizations are currently participating in the ACCESS program.” with a link, consider saying “Scroll down to see which institutions and organizations…”

  • (CG) Quick link goes to https://operations.access-ci.org/online_services/ticket_system vs. here https://support.access-ci.org/help-ticket Question for tracks

GET INVOLVED

https://access.qltddev.com/about/get-involved/

  • (Deems) general comment, I don’t see this linked from the landing page. I see it linked from the “About” page.

  • (Deems) this first paragraph needs proofread and word-smithed:

    • “Being a part of ACCESS will give you a unique experience, allow you the opportunity to network with other researchers, and give you the chance to discover valuable insights on how to get your research project rolling.”

      • We should lead with an overview of the ways people can get involved rather than very generic text about unique experiences.

      • (Towns) Not everyone has a research project to get rolling. What if they are an educator or potential RP?

  • (Knuth) Same comment about the perhaps out of date website as I had above (or maybe I’m out of date). This time I’m referring to the CCEP link https://support.access-ci.org/ccep/ccep-details

  • No labels