Rename Incident Reports (IRs) to Field Reports (FRs)

[virtual256]

While Operating, I have had multiple times where a ranger would come up to the window and ask for an "incident number" in an unclear fashion. This was either asking for the IMS number for something or talking about a previous report they had submitted. The moment of confusion is something we can mitigate by changing the name to be something clearly distinct.

I propose using "Field incident reports" (FIRs) instead, in all places that they are referenced - the Ranger accessible page to generate them, the IMS entries themselves, and the backend list of FIRs themselves.

[virtual256]

Related to this, having the number itself be "FIR-0001" will further differentiate from "IMS-0123" style numbers.

[wsanchez]

@virtual256 I myself have been challenged by the similarity and had been at a loss for a better name, but I like your suggestion.

How do we feel about shorting that to "field report", which makes it a little more distinct as well as shorter?

[virtual256]

Taking out the overlapping "I" feels like a plus. I like it.

[kimballa]

+1!

[srabraham]

As a first step, we could just do the rename in user-facing client code (i.e. just a few places in html templates and JS). That'd be easy, and wouldn't be as risky as relocating APIs, doing various DB migrations, and updating lots of Python.

[kimballa]

That would definitely be a big improvement, and accomplishes what I care about most!

…

On Mon, Nov 4, 2024, 5:48 AM Sean R. Abraham ***@***.***> wrote: As a first step, we could just do the rename in user-facing client code (i.e. just a few places in html templates and JS). That'd be easy, and wouldn't be as risky as relocating APIs, doing various DB migrations, and updating lots of Python. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#371 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAVKUDY226MC3F4F6NHL7TZ65UJNAVCNFSM6AAAAABREJSM4OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINJUG43DGNJRHA> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[srabraham]

@kimballa @wsanchez I'm doing the aforementioned surface-level tweaks now. One question for both of you: are we good to standardize on "IMS #" for incidents and "FR #" for field reports? We don't actually have those initialisms in the system now, but they seem like the most reasonable choices.

[virtual256]

That language is perfect, thank you.

[srabraham]

Note to self: we'll need to update various documentation in response to this change