Feedback route

[amyjko]

What are you trying to do that you can't?

Feedback is currently only available in a page footer dialog. It's a cramped space for feedback. The one advantage it has is that it is available everywhere, but that isn't necessary; it could just be a feedback form.

What is your idea?

Create a standalone /feedback route that incorporates all of the current functionality, but in a less cramped layout. This will also allow us to do more interesting things with feedback (sorting, filtering, searching), maybe even pulling in all of the GitHub issues.

[susan4syw]

Hi @amyjko , I'd like to take this, starting with design. Could you assign me?

[amyjko]

Sure! I look forward to seeing what kind of designs you come up with.

[susan4syw]

@amyjko Thanks for assigning me design on this.

Need

![Current footer feedback dialog: tabs, clipped rows, write form underneath.]

Reporting a 🪲 or sharing a 💡 should feel possible in the moment, and people should be able to see if someone already said the same thing. The footer dialog does that, but it’s too small to browse and write in. A page also leaves room later for sort/filter/search, and maybe GitHub issues on the same list, that can be later version of this design.

Feedback already lives in Wordplay’s store. Moderators can already paste a GitHub URL onto an item.

Proposal

A Feedback page, same chrome as Projects. Footer 💡/🪲 stays, but it goes to this page instead of opening a dialog.

Two screens, like Canvas discussions and like our Projects list (+ then a new screen):

List (/feedback) — defect/idea tabs, + top right, sort liked / newest, full-height cards (title, date, likes; expand for description, comments, actions). Same behaviors as today: like, comment, edit/close/delete, defect capture. Signed out: browse; write/comment still need login. + is visible signed out (inactive or to login), same as Projects.

![Proposed list: header, tabs, + top right, liked/newest sort, full-height cards.]

Write (from +) — defect or idea, title, body, submit, back to the list. Should feel like a Canvas new-discussion, not a squeezed footer field. I’d like the body to allow pictures and symbols so a student can show a bug. Today it’s title + plain text and we have no image upload, so pictures may need to be a follow-up; symbols/emoji are closer to what we already ship.

![Proposed write page from +: title, large body with room for pictures/symbols, submit.]

One column, so it holds up on a phone.

Not in this design: search, extra filters, showing GitHub issues on the page.

[amyjko]

Thanks for the first draft @susan4syw. A few reactions:

• I don't think using Canvas as a source of design conventions is a good idea. A feedback page is not the same thing as a discussion page. Moreover, there are privacy risks in making the page an open discussion. The current design is intentionally a fairly narrow flow of youth posting, moderators replying. It's not an open forum by design.
• Uploading images would be helpful, but arbitrary upload of images is high risk from a COPA policy perspective, requiring immense care with content moderation, personally identifiable information. One of the reasons for the current design is that we capture everything knowable from the current page they are on, which is often enough to reproduce the issue without an image.
• We don't yet support a full rich text editor. That's probably out of scope of this issue.
• I'd love to see how you might refine the design of your issue editing and commenting features. The design proposal above doesn't really show how those would take advantage of the standalone page.
• There is also a set of moderation features that you can't see because you're not a mod. Let me know if you'd like to be a mod, so you can examine them. You can also read the code that implements them to see what's there.
• I do think that pulling in GitHub issues is a potentially good idea. We have the metadata for it.

[susan4syw]

@amyjko Thanks for clarifying. I should explain that I was only using Canvas as a visual reference for the list → “+” → separate submission-page layout. I wasn’t proposing an open discussion forum or changing the current youth-to-moderator interaction model.
That said, I understand why the comparison suggested broader discussion behavior, so I’ll remove it from the next draft. I’ll also leave image uploads and rich-text editing out of scope.
For the revision, I’ll keep the existing privacy and interaction boundaries, and focus on how a standalone page could improve the feedback lifecycle: viewing an item, editing it, moderator replies, comments, status changes, moderation tools, and linked GitHub issue metadata.
I'd also appreciate moderator access so I can examine the existing moderation experience before revising the design. Thank you!

[amyjko]

Send me your wordplay username and I can give you mod access.