Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Backwards navigation and hierarchy view have different (and worse) rules about what they show compared to forward navigation #4569

Open
lognaturel opened this issue May 18, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels

Comments

@lognaturel
Copy link
Member

Software and hardware versions

Collect v1.30.1, master

Problem description

Backwards navigation and hierarchy view have different (and worse) rules about what they show compared to forward navigation.

Steps to reproduce the problem

  1. Create a form with a repeat that could have no contents for some instances. E.g. vegetables.xlsx
  2. Fill out the form such that some instances are relevant and some are not. For example, select two vegetables in the attached form.
  3. Swipe forward to see the expected behavior.
  4. Swipe back to see a screen for each repeat instance, even those with no contents.
  5. Go to the hierarchy view from one of the "ghost" repeats to see more badness.
bug.mp4

Expected behavior

If there are no visible notes in a repeat instance, that whole repeat instance should be skipped in all cases. The forward navigation behavior should be replicated.

Other information

Related to #4457.

@lognaturel lognaturel added the bug label May 18, 2021
@lognaturel
Copy link
Member Author

This variation works as expected (other than #4570).

@seadowg seadowg added this to the v2021.3 milestone Jul 13, 2021
@lognaturel lognaturel removed this from the v2021.3 milestone Jul 22, 2021
@dimwight
Copy link
Contributor

Had a look at this but made little headway.
XLSForm didn't like vegetables.xlsx at all to start with, then the repeats didn't work.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants