6 min⚡️7 min 20 sec5 min 52 sec4 min 53 sec3 min 54 sec3 min 27 sec2 min 56 sec2 min 20 sec
0.8×
1×
1.2×
1.5×
1.7×
2×
2.5×
6 min⚡️7 min 20 sec5 min 52 sec4 min 53 sec3 min 54 sec3 min 27 sec2 min 56 sec2 min 20 sec
joy
1
love
2
wow
3
yay
4
up
5
down
6
More reactions
7
2 Comments
Matt Delprado
Nov 20, 2022
(edited)
@Mark Davies This is an interesting alternative to the "manually save the view" model in AR.
Mark Davies
Nov 20, 2022
ooo I really like this. cc @Hannah Beck
Hannah Beck
Nov 21, 2022
Interesting! Thanks for the tag @Mark Davies
Natalie Rowland
Nov 23, 2022
@Jonny Lu
Reply
Sherif Mansour
Nov 20, 2022
@Matt Hodges@Niraj Patil@Nir Nikolaevsky I know we don't have full design patterns yet for Atlas in other products, but I'm assuming we'd always go with "Atlas Goals" instead of "Goals" here if the north star is to communicate to customers there is a brand that powers goals across all products (so people realise it's the same Goal), yeah? Or any differing thoughts? Matt owns this decision.
Matt Hodges
Nov 21, 2022
(edited)
Thanks for flagging @Sherif Mansour . @Niraj Patil@Kristy Donaldson and I discussed this last week and we all agreed we should prefix the object, in this case, "goals", with Atlas. We also agreed that we'd not treat the object as a proper noun, hence "Atlas goals/projects". Are you cool with that decision?
Matt Hodges
Nov 21, 2022
Also related, we talked about checking in with the JPD team to see if we might be able to rename the OOTB "Goal" field to "Outcome" or something along those lines to mitigate potential customer confusion.
Sherif Mansour
Nov 21, 2022
Yes, my main rationale is the same goals object will be in JSW, JWM, Confluence, Trello, JPD.. and it's important for the user to know it's the _same_ object, I can't think of another way to solve this other than prefix with "Atlas" is part of our design guidelines for using Atlas outside the Atlas context for product teams.
Matt Hodges
Nov 21, 2022
👍
Matt Delprado
Nov 22, 2022
This sounds like a pattern we should be consistent around for all cross project usage of core concepts. Is there a way we can codify that somewhere rather than making this decision just for Atlas and then making a different one for a different product later? Or having guides on when to prefix and when not to?
James Bryant
Nov 23, 2022
+1 to DP's point, same would apply to a lot of other objects like Confluence pages, Atlas teams, lots of development objects etc.
Bigger problem seems like we'd be setting ourselves up for a lot of customer confusion and pain to correct in the future. Has there been any consideration towards unshipping JPD's version of goals before it becomes sticky with customers and replacing it entirely with Atlas' goals? Struggling to think of why we'd want to support two versions of the same object (in the customer's eyes)
James Bryant
Nov 23, 2022
> Yes, my main rationale is the same goals object will be in JSW, JWM, Confluence, Trello, JPD.. and it's important for the user to know it's the _same_ object @Sherif Mansour Is it important enough that a user needs to understand this before using it though? I'm assuming most users will likely only use goals in the one context. For those using it across contexts, there's visual cues that we can add in the UI to aid this (eg 'Powered by Atlas', and 'View in Atlas')
Adding 'Atlas' as a prefix adds a cognitive load before someone even uses this feature, you're asking them to think about our product architecture in the middle of their task, and in some cases it's before they even understand the value. I'm sure we can find more explicit ways that demonstrate the shared nature of these types of objects without making their naming more complex.
Natalie Rowland
Nov 23, 2022
Absolutely James. There is something tricky about putting Atlas in front of the goal - goals are owned by people, teams, organisations. It's their goal. Atlas Goals dilutes the power of the goal object somehow, obscuring the focus that goals provide.
Bigger problem seems like we'd be setting ourselves up for a lot of customer confusion and pain to correct in the future. Has there been any consideration towards unshipping JPD's version of goals before it becomes sticky with customers and replacing it entirely with Atlas' goals? Struggling to think of why we'd want to support two versions of the same object (in the customer's eyes)
@Sherif Mansour Is it important enough that a user needs to understand this before using it though? I'm assuming most users will likely only use goals in the one context. For those using it across contexts, there's visual cues that we can add in the UI to aid this (eg 'Powered by Atlas', and 'View in Atlas')
Adding 'Atlas' as a prefix adds a cognitive load before someone even uses this feature, you're asking them to think about our product architecture in the middle of their task, and in some cases it's before they even understand the value. I'm sure we can find more explicit ways that demonstrate the shared nature of these types of objects without making their naming more complex.