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
Provide a set of custom options that should be selectable, e.g. 'Other', 'Not applicable' and 'Unknown'.
Use case: data entry form where users should select a concept from an ontology or, if no option is suitable, state the reason why this property cannot be filled in, i.e. explain the missing (to avoid storing an empty value (i.e. no information) and we do not know why no information is provided).
This use case is needed when autocomplete is used in a form to define keywords, for example. The purpose of a reusable widget is to be used in different kinds of use cases, especially for linking semantic concepts; this new feature wouldn't make it more complex, but it would make it more widely applicable IMO.
I see the following realisation (based on #14 (comment)):
Creating two checkboxes for "not applicable" (if key terms are not allowed/needed) and "unknown" (if the user doesn't know what to enter). The option "others" (if no matching key term is found in the autocomplete) could be displayed within the autocomplete drop down if nothing else matches.
In a first implementation, the input property will be the IRIs of the three concepts, provided they are represented in the underlying terminology service database (the selected API). In a second implementation (when the TS4NFDI Gateway is available and value sets are implemented), a value set can be created and applied.
To discuss in our weekly
Provide a set of custom options that should be selectable, e.g. 'Other', 'Not applicable' and 'Unknown'.
Use case: data entry form where users should select a concept from an ontology or, if no option is suitable, state the reason why this property cannot be filled in, i.e. explain the missing (to avoid storing an empty value (i.e. no information) and we do not know why no information is provided).
See #14 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: