Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'coding layouts'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Technical Support
    • General Technical Information
    • Intella 10/100/250/Pro/Team
    • Intella Connect/Node
    • Wishlist
  • News and announcements
    • Announcements
  • Talking Tech with Vound
    • Webinars

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 3 results

  1. During recent reviews and in light of user feedback, I wanted to propose two coding layout improvements for a future version of Connect. The first has to do with adding a collapsing arrowhead for the top level tags, as they currently exist under the Tags facet. The use case for this has to do with the presence of long list of coding options. Examples might be required references to corresponding Document Request numbers (a common component of production specifications), or complex issues tagging that reviewers apply during review in order to leverage in later stages of a litigation matter when document productions are complete. Allowing these lists to be collapsible would presumably make for an improved user experience, as well as made the coding panel less cluttered when these specific options are not in use, as different reviewers have different objectives at different times, etc. Another possible alternative to accommodate this might be allowing multiple, customizable tabs to be added, with certain coding layout content assigned to certain tabs. I know I have seen this approached used in some other review platforms, and it offered a reasonable way to fit more options into a smaller space. The second has to do with making better use of the available screen real estate for coding layout content. In its current iteration, there is a significant amount of blank space in the right side of the coding pane, which begs for an additional column, to display more options without requiring scrolling (which I have found to annoy users). In my estimation, the text size used in the coding layout is very generous, and larger than what I am used to seeing elsewhere. However, the value in having a second column of options outweighs that, in my mind. Regardless, perhaps having an option whether to force two columns would be another approach, perhaps in conjunction with the separate tabs idea. Regardless, the current iteration of the Review tab UI is the best ever, and we're looking forward to future improvements to make the most painful, expensive phase of the ediscovery process as simple and streamlined as possible for reviewers. Jason
  2. I have created two Global Coding Layouts (can be shared between cases) and I have found that 1 of them is no longer needed but I cannot figure out or find any information on how to delete one. Can someone please inform me how I can delete a global coding layout?
  3. Hi guys, Wondered if there was a way around completed batches defaulting to 'Read Only' mode. We have an issue when the client wishes to review a batch for the second time as they are unable to revisit the initial batch as it becomes locked from editing.
  • Create New...