Consider rewording "failed [to process]" as "with errors"...

[hoyla]

Given that Giant's UI is pretty monochrome the failure icon and "failed" text in the Processing Stage column of workspaces is pretty dominant.

A user reported to me that a folder was full of failed files so the folder was useless. But in fact the files were perfectly readable. In other words the processing errors weren't really so bad that the documents can't be viewed - but the user assumed they were unusable.

Now there are cases where "failed" really is failed, and Giant can't render the document at all. But these are the minority. So I'd suggest:

1. Quick win: we change the word "failed" in the Processing Stage column to "with errors" (this form makes the summary at the folder level of Processing Stage makes sense - e.g. "18 with errors". I'm uncomfortable with "18 errors" because we're actually talking about the number of files with problems, not the number of problems.
2. More difficult: is it possible to distinguish between a critical processing failure - when the only option is to attempt to download the document - and a less critical processing failure where there may be issues but they're not showstoppers? It'd be good to know the criteria that led to the "failed" state if possible.