Hi Melissa and Naomi ,

Let me know your thoughts on how best to deal with the above. I would be happy to hop on a call and discuss what changes we need to make to the design of the dispute details tab to make this work.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Its possible this may have been missed when altering the "proceeding details" accordion to accommodate for the legal analytics groups (https://industrialagency.tpondemand.com/entity/15751-dispute-document-greater-card-greater-card).  

A good solution may be to list the tribunal and committee fields above the legal analytics fields within the proceeding details accordion, similar to how it is in the dispute details page. 

Please advise if this approach will work, and I can create a card for this in target process.

Thanks, 

Naomi

Hi Naomi ,

Ok. That works as an interim solution. However, would it be possible to have this displayed without need to select "Expand proceeding details"?

image.png 137 KB • Download

Or would this be too significant a change at this point?

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Please review the following card to address this: https://industrialagency.tpondemand.com/entity/20952-islg-team-feedback-greater-display-of.

As per Melissa 's comment in the card, would you please confirm if the fields for the Arbitrator acronym as they are written in the card are correct? I was not able to see some on this sheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ho_yBR8gfCIqivmvkPy_hISkDGozdWsXxn46ImeQ-V4/edit#gid=1780667146 for P1, C1, and R1. 

Thank you, 

Naomi

Hi Naomi ,

This is a good start, but I think Column 4 in the user story should include information for all tribunals and annulment committees for the dispute (i.e., all the information displayed in the Dispute view). Here is an example of what would be displayed under Column 4 for
IC/0091: Víctor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v. Republic of Chile I (ICSID Case No. ARB/98/2)

image.png 144 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan , 

Please review updated criteria on the card based on your above comment, and also confirm that acronyms in yellow highlight for both the Tribunal fieldset and Tribunal Resubmission fieldset are correct. 

Thanks, 

Naomi

Hi Naomi ,

The updated requirements in https://industrialagency.tpondemand.com/restui/board.aspx?#page=userstory/20952 look good. Note that I made some edits to ensure it's clear that the position in brackets is displayed next to each tribunal/annulment committee member, similar to what we are already displaying in the proceeding details card in the Dispute & Dispute Document library:

image.png 73 KB • Download

To answer your question about the P1, C1 and R1, I believe we discarded these as acronyms and only used P, C and R. However, these acronyms were only meant to be used to pull data from the Article Citator Master List, and we never formerly assigned acronyms to positions to be presented on the Subscriber side. The example above shows that we've created that association these acronyms with positions somewhere. Could someone provide me with a list so that I can review and confirm it? 

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Thank you for confirming the card, I've tagged Harsh so he can review all the criteria thoroughly and confirm if there would be any technical issues to display this information. 

I have removed the P1, C1, and R1 line from the criteria as P, C and R are already in use. I was referencing the People: Capacity - ISLG Master List and People: Capacity - Proceeding Stage in the ISLG Data Migration map to confirm the requirements. 

Thanks, 

Naomi

Great. Thanks Naomi .

Harsh , further to the screenshot in my previous comment above, we appear to be associating acronyms with specific roles within the application (e.g., Arbitrator (President) = P, Arbitrator Appointed by Claimant = C, etc.). Where is this list stored in the application? I'd like to review to ensure we've created all the appropriate acronyms for all the roles.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan , 

Based on our conversation today regarding displaying tribunal information within the "proceeding details" accordion on dispute document card backs, and dispute document view pages, please see the following updates on the card: https://industrialagency.tpondemand.com/entity/20952-islg-team-feedback-greater-display-of. 

Hi Naomi ,

This works for the time-being. At the same time, I see the card is in Open status. We'll want to get these changes implemented before launch. We really need some form a tribunal information on the dispute document cards.
 
Thanks,

Morgan 

Hi Morgan , 

Right, I've moved this to the backlog

Hi Morgan and Naomi ,

We did this change as per user story and discussion on staging.islg. Please check and confirm.

Hi Harsh ,

I'll let Naomi test and complete UAT in the relevant cards, but the changes look good. However, further to my comments last week and the screenshot below, please ensure spaces are inserted between the people name and the field label:

image.png 148 KB • Download

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We have added space between People Name and Filed label on staging.islg. Please check and confirm.

Hi Harsh ​,

I've moved the to-do here: https://3.basecamp.com/3691577/buckets/5559242/todolists/2849135605, because we'll need to implement the longer term solution to this issue reported in the other cards.

I'll remove this from the high priority to-do list.

Thanks,

Morgan

No longer an issue.