Design Meeting Internal February 11, 2021

Participants

• Jamie H.
• Murray J
• Joost v.
• Tiegan H.
• Karolina P.
• Drew R.
• Will C.
• Malaika U.
• Nicky H.
• Sahar S.
• Philip L.
• Vanessa G.

Minutes

• Tiegan walked us through GSC concepts

• Tiegan: most people won’t want to look at a probabilistic risk

  • better to profile earthquake scenarios

• Phil: Kibana is for more advanced users

• Nicky: should we connect to the earthquakes Canada site?

  • Murray: earthquakes Canada is focused on the engineering community
    • we can bring a feed of earthquakes and link to the authoritative sources

• Phil: main motivation for this concept was to make sure we have the technical content required

• Jamie: users may get a little lost in this interface

  • Karolina: we should use these concepts to highlight the information that’s required, instead of looking at these as the design
  • Tiegan: by muni view could allow users to explore other areas of interest (e.g. region)
    • this could allow us to get rid of the third tab

• Review by-hazard tab:

• Murray: Is there a way we can link the map to the visualizations?

  • Jamie: yes, we just need to make sure that the back-end can support it (e.g. will it be fast enough)
  • Murray: maps help people understand the spatial distribution, but they don’t do a good job of helping users understand the risk. So * Having interactivity between map and chart is effective.
  • Jamie: we need specific use-cases for this
  • Phil: some map exploration is required for municipal users

• Tiegan: we need a button that says “Explore Scenarios for this municipality” in the muni tab

Chat notes:

08:41:05 From Malaika U. to Everyone:
I see it as imperative to include the earthquake scenarios.

09:15:33 From Sahar S. to Everyone:
Good morning all. Apologies, with school drop off I can’t make it earlier. But glad to catch part of the discussion.

09:45:33 From Murray J. to Everyone:
What if the map stays put and you bring in the charts in the lower left?

09:46:44 From Tiegan H. to Everyone:
I like what Murray has here, to combine the two ideas. Also would like to think about how the scenario catalogue will interact with this.

09:47:25 From Malaika U. to Everyone:
Yes. Can scenario locations be layered on top of the earthquake risk map at every scale?

09:52:41 From Tiegan H. to Everyone:
I’m picturing that they would go on the map if you select it under ‘which hazard’, and then you’d just have one more element to select (which scenario)