Redesigning ErrorsPanel to display warnings and custom messages supplied by host

[wifun]

In our old designer page we used to have our own panel to display errors and warnings.

For the new designer we'd like to propose redesigning the ErrorsPanel to support warnings (and also ability for host to supply own errors/warnings).

V1 checker panel today:

ErrorsPanel today:

Today there's not a large set of warnings we show. All our "custom" errors/warnings are associated with a specific operation. Some of them (warnings) are:

• deprecated connector
• approval action with too many custom actions
• performance warning if dataverse actions used w/o filtering parameters
• approvals provisioning (not ready for use yet)
• licensing related (for example if a premium action was used where flow is saved but cannot be run)

PM + Designer team on our side have proposed what they are thinking: https://www.figma.com/file/ordHRzk9b8MJKajQUdS26a/V3---Post-Build?type=design&node-id=2505-2135&mode=design&t=pnLtxBl3xUyus3oT-0

Some things I observed:

• Looks like the design does not factor in "Workflow Parameters" at the moment
• If LA plans to have categories for errors per operation like multiple connections errors we may want to have another level of nesting.
• It also doesn't seem very clear how to "open operation" in the new design
• "Flow Checker" for the panel name seems specific to PowerAutomate, how about "Checker" (open to suggestions)

What are your initial thoughts? Any feedback I should take to design team?

[wifun]

Since my team's immediate focus is to get licensing related warnings to show up in the panel, I believe an intermediate step would be to keep the look mostly how it is today, but have a tab for errors and a tab for warnings.

[kisubedi]

Yes I agree William

[wifun]

POC:

[wifun]

@kisubedi do you have any better alternatives to a Display Name for the panel? It used to be "Errors", now that the panel also supports warnings I have renamed it to "Checker" since the panel is shared by LA and PAuto designers

[kisubedi]

Love the way it is looking btw.

[rllyy97]

Yeah I think this is great for now! Looks good
I'm also okay doing something like you sent to me last week where you had both the errors and warnings in the same cards. We would need to adjust the headings a bit but would keep it all on the same view if we think that would be a better experience.
Also we're fine just calling it Flow Checker as well in both Logic Apps and PA (just Checker seems a little generic imo)

[rllyy97]

I think it might be better for you all to implement this panel outside of the LAUX repo, and just not show our error panel.
For a few reasons:

• LA does not show any warnings as far as I know, they're all errors
• LA's individual errors are all single strings, we don't have any info for How to fix like you all have in your examples
• In my opinion the designs for the two use-cases honestly don't seem to match even though they do serve similar purposes
  • Without the verbosity of the how to fix, action's error data in LA would be better displayed how we have it now with one card per action, and clicking takes you to the operation parameters directly. Just looking at the proposed designs we'd have expandable entries for a parameter that might just say invalid parameter and that's all

I think overall it might be cleaner just to have these as two different panels (our errors and your flowChecker) rather than trying to make a hybrid solution that works for both of us. I know we already expose our error data, if there is anything else you would need exposed it shouldn't be an issue to make those changes. With the recent panel refactor I did, things are also able to be set up to hold outside selected panels in LA state, so opening the outside FC panel will close the currently open panel and vice-versa (if you would like that functionality)

For now if you would just like to add a warnings tab to the existing panel like you mentioned I think that would be fine and we would be able to just hide the tabs in LA. But if there are going to be significant design changes I think it'd be better to make a new panel.

[kisubedi]

***@***.*** ***@***.***> for visibility as he had agreed on the concept of Warnings tab in Flow checker pane at a high level previously. ***@***.*** ***@***.***>, @edgar ***@***.***> LA can choose to hide the warnings tab in Flow checker pane if they don't' feel relevant, or until they have a few warnings they'd like to show. I think its still a good idea to adopt the concept but not enable it until it becomes relevant. Would love to know what Travis and William/Edgar think about this. Sincerely, Kishor Subedi From: Riley Evans ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 9:18 AM To: Azure/LogicAppsUX ***@***.***> Cc: Kishor Subedi ***@***.***>; Comment ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [Azure/LogicAppsUX] Redesigning ErrorsPanel to display warnings and custom messages supplied by host (Discussion #3971) I think it might be better for you all to implement this panel outside of the LAUX repo, and just not show our error panel. For a few reasons: * LA does not show any warnings as far as I know, they're all errors * LA's individual errors are all single strings, we don't have any info for How to fix like you all have in your examples * In my opinion the designs for the two use-cases honestly don't seem to match even though they do serve similar purposes * Without the verbosity of the how to fix, action's error data in LA would be better displayed how we have it now with one card per action, and clicking takes you to the operation parameters directly. Just looking at the proposed designs we'd have expandable entries for a parameter that might just say invalid parameter and that's all I think overall it might be cleaner just to have these as two different panels (our errors and your flowChecker) rather than trying to make a hybrid solution that works for both of us. I know we already expose our error data, if there is anything else you would need exposed it shouldn't be an issue to make those changes. For now if you would just like to add a warnings tab to the existing panel like you mentioned I think that would be fine and we would be able to just hide the tabs in LA. But if there are going to be significant design changes I think it'd be better to make a new panel. - Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3971 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVYNEZ35K5DZU5VG3QH5KHTYPABVLAVCNFSM6AAAAABBXEM5LCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DCNJZGY4TE>. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[wifun]

@hartra344 would like to hear your feedback here. I have already made some progress (see screenshot above) towards the host supplying some custom errors/warnings to the pane.

Based on the LA errors and their look today, I believe the proposed UI designs can be adjusted to work for both LA and PAuto's needs (since we want a checker to handle both LA and PAuto's errors/warnings whether we make separate panels or not).

Concerns may be:

1. whether we anticipate the looks of PAuto and LA errors/warnings diverging in the future
2. if we prefer host supplying custom errors/warnings that are blindly added to the pane or the other way around (if we separate panels)

[kisubedi]

I do think it makes sense to come to an agreement on what this should look like and how it should work. We don’t have warnings today, but we are likely to add some soonish, particularly some warnings from copilot. As for the design, I'll take a look sometime today and give my feedback. Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>

…

________________________________ From: Kishor Subedi ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 9:45:25 AM To: Azure/LogicAppsUX ***@***.***>; Azure/LogicAppsUX ***@***.***>; Travis Harris ***@***.***>; William Fung ***@***.***>; Edgar Guo ***@***.***> Cc: Comment ***@***.***> Subject: RE: [Azure/LogicAppsUX] Redesigning ErrorsPanel to display warnings and custom messages supplied by host (Discussion #3971) ***@***.*** ***@***.***> for visibility as he had agreed on the concept of Warnings tab in Flow checker pane at a high level previously. ***@***.*** ***@***.***>, @edgar ***@***.***> LA can choose to hide the warnings tab in Flow checker pane if they don’t’ feel relevant, or until they have a few warnings they’d like to show. I think its still a good idea to adopt the concept but not enable it until it becomes relevant. Would love to know what Travis and William/Edgar think about this. Sincerely, Kishor Subedi From: Riley Evans ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 9:18 AM To: Azure/LogicAppsUX ***@***.***> Cc: Kishor Subedi ***@***.***>; Comment ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [Azure/LogicAppsUX] Redesigning ErrorsPanel to display warnings and custom messages supplied by host (Discussion #3971) I think it might be better for you all to implement this panel outside of the LAUX repo, and just not show our error panel. For a few reasons: * LA does not show any warnings as far as I know, they're all errors * LA's individual errors are all single strings, we don't have any info for How to fix like you all have in your examples * In my opinion the designs for the two use-cases honestly don't seem to match even though they do serve similar purposes * Without the verbosity of the how to fix, action's error data in LA would be better displayed how we have it now with one card per action, and clicking takes you to the operation parameters directly. Just looking at the proposed designs we'd have expandable entries for a parameter that might just say invalid parameter and that's all I think overall it might be cleaner just to have these as two different panels (our errors and your flowChecker) rather than trying to make a hybrid solution that works for both of us. I know we already expose our error data, if there is anything else you would need exposed it shouldn't be an issue to make those changes. For now if you would just like to add a warnings tab to the existing panel like you mentioned I think that would be fine and we would be able to just hide the tabs in LA. But if there are going to be significant design changes I think it'd be better to make a new panel. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3971 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVYNEZ35K5DZU5VG3QH5KHTYPABVLAVCNFSM6AAAAABBXEM5LCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DCNJZGY4TE>. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[kisubedi]

Can it be called Flow checker? It used to be called that in v1, but I am not sure if LA had Flow checker panel. If not, I think Checker should be fine. Confirming with design team/content team in the meanwhile. From: wifun ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 11:18 AM To: Azure/LogicAppsUX ***@***.***> Cc: Kishor Subedi ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [Azure/LogicAppsUX] Redesigning ErrorsPanel to display warnings and custom messages supplied by host (Discussion #3971) @kisubedi<https://github.com/kisubedi> do you have any better alternatives to a Display Name for the panel? It used to be "Errors", now that the panel also supports warnings I have renamed it to "Checker" since the panel is shared by LA and PAuto designers - Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3971 (reply in thread)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVYNEZ6KQP3EDPL3MFC5OU3YPFYPRAVCNFSM6AAAAABBXEM5LCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DCNZTGMZTI>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>