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

Allow for second "meeting pattern" #290

Open
rpruim opened this issue Nov 26, 2022 · 7 comments
Open

Allow for second "meeting pattern" #290

rpruim opened this issue Nov 26, 2022 · 7 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request high high priority

Comments

@rpruim
Copy link
Collaborator

rpruim commented Nov 26, 2022

According to Raymond, approximately 8% of classes have 2 meeting patterns (time/day combos). Workday is going to have two fields for this (meeting pattern 1 and meeting pattern 2). We should probably have the option to do this in the app as well. This will require

  • expanding the popover interface for course creation/update
  • adding some additional columns to the data
  • correctly identifying when there is just one meeting time vs two
  • placing session rectangles correctly in the various graphical views
@rpruim rpruim added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 26, 2022
@rpruim
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rpruim commented Nov 26, 2022

Just a note that currently what the app calls a "Meeting" is what workday calls a meeting pattern.

export interface Meeting {
  // All days on which the given Meeting time and room is applicable
  days: Day[];
  // In minutes 
  duration: number;
  isConflict?: boolean;
  isNonstandardTime?: boolean;  // feature to be added 
  location: Location;
  // Like "8:00 AM" or "12:30 PM"
  startTime: string;
}

And a section already contains a list of meeting (pattern)s:

So this might be a fairly easy thing to implement:

  • add another set of days/start/duration input elements matching one to the meetings[0] and the other to meetings[1]

@rpruim
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rpruim commented Nov 26, 2022

Additional note: Currently the red conflict borders are tied to meeting patterns, not to individual meetings. So if a MWRF class intersects with a TR class, all six days are outlined in red. This isn't necessarily a bug, but we could consider whether it is the desired functionality.

For classes with multiple meeting patterns, I think the highlighting will be by meeting pattern since I'm seeing

forEach(section.meetings, (meeting) => { ... }

inside getEvents(), which is used to generate the schedule items grouped by room, faculty member, or department.

So in this case, it won't be the entire section that is highlighted, only the offending meeting pattern.

@rpruim rpruim added the high high priority label Nov 27, 2022
@rpruim rpruim added this to the Ready for 2023-24 Scheduling milestone Nov 27, 2022
@rpruim
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rpruim commented Nov 27, 2022

this isn't absolutely critical for the current round of scheduling, but it would be a really helpful feature to add so that people don't have to hack their way around it.

@jmw-75
Copy link
Collaborator

jmw-75 commented Feb 13, 2023

@rpruim Do you have any schedules to use for testing regarding the 8% of classes with the two meeting patterns?

@rpruim
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rpruim commented Feb 13, 2023

I think we'll need to get help from student success for this since it looks like I only have access to my department's schedule using the report that I've been looking at.

I'll contact someone over there to get a file.

@jmw-75
Copy link
Collaborator

jmw-75 commented Feb 13, 2023

@kvlinden If you could provide one of the workday files here that would be great.

@kvlinden
Copy link
Collaborator

kvlinden commented Feb 13, 2023

See the CS 262 schedule in this document. MW is different from F.
Course_Enrollment.xlsx
I pulled this .xlsx from the WorkDay fall 2022 enrollment report.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request high high priority
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants