alaveteli
alaveteli copied to clipboard
mysociety
Update descriptions of classifications
-
"A response will be sent by postal mail" could be generalised to cover all off-site responses. Much more common now than "gone postal" is a user receiving information directly via personal email. A user going to pick up material occasionally occurs and is analogous to a response by post, but could be better captured by a more general: "a response has been, or is to be, provided outside of [site name]". This could be shortened to "Off-site response".
-
Withdrawn could be generalised by renaming it "Abandoned". More common than an actual active withdrawal is failing to pursue a request, eg. failing to provide a requested clarification, failing to act on an error/bounce message etc.
-
While looking at this there's a slight inconsistency between "No response has been received" and "Some of the information has been sent", "All the information has been sent". Perhaps "sent" in the latter two cases would ideally be "received".
The suggestion in the first bullet here had been already ticketed at #3841
Add clearer description for waiting_clarification.
A user noted that they thought this was to be used if they were waiting for clarification from the authority, rather than the authority waiting for clarification from them.
We could add waiting_clarification._from_requestor and waiting_clarification_from_authority
Or
Make it clear that waiting_clarification. is to use when an authority has asked the requestor to clarify the information that they have requested
Regarding "Still waiting for information", some users select this when it has really been refused.
Just to note that our practice on WhatDoTheyKnow is to use the "withdrawn" classification for requests accidentally made to defunct bodies.
A user has raised a concern about our wording around "not held" responses. This classification tends to be used when the authority says they don't have the information. We don't usually know if they really don't have it.
Perhaps text such as:
"The authority say they don't have the information (maybe they suggested who might)"
[Body name] say they did not have the information requested.
would be an improvement?
Is that too insubordinate ?
The same user as mentioned above has questioned our form which asks users to classify their "request". Really we are asking them to classify the latest state of their correspondence, and often to assess the response.
We often use "request" as to mean for "request-thread" / "correspondence thread but is that clear to others?
The same user as mentioned above has questioned our form which asks users to classify their "request". Really we are asking them to classify the latest state of their correspondence, and often to assess the response.
We often use "request" as to mean for "request-thread" / "correspondence thread but is that clear to others?
It's often hard to tell with things like that, because once you're immersed in an environment, the language becomes normal.
However, I think there are possibly some analogous uses of language in other domains that would support treating "request" as "request-thread":
- How is your job application progressing? — The application is finished, because the potential employer has received it, but is still deciding whether to hire — "The application is still ongoing."
- …
Although, just because there are analogous uses and we don't think it's incorrect(assuming we do), doesn't mean it couldn't be clarified.
The user
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/gaz_jack
has withdrawn many requests, apparently after not receiving responses.
Regarding "Still waiting for information", some users select this when it has really been refused.
Just to note that this appears to have happened again.