WebOffice is a dynamic product and thrives on customer requirements. WebOffice Ideas is a platform for customers to submit requirements and feature requests on the one hand, on the other hand you can view and vote for other requirements here. It is not a support platform, but a platform to co-design WebOffice. There is one access per customer. If you do not have access yet, please contact the WebOffice product management via email at email@example.com!
To prevent misunderstandings, an exact description of the feature request is necessary. Use click-by-click instructions, screenshots, links to the user manual etc. if necessary!
WebOffice Ideas - Status definitions
- new: Idea has been reported, but not yet viewed/evaluated by Product Management
- Effort estimate to follow: has already been evaluated by Product Management, effort for implementation still under clarification
- Cost sharing sought: Effort for strategic implementation too high, customers with cost sharing sought
- open: has already been evaluated by Product Management and released for potential votes
- open (fixed): already evaluated by product management and scheduled for implementation by product owner
- to be clarified VertiGIS: Idea still needs to be clarified by Product Management, e.g. work-around, possibility of implementation, etc.
- to be clarified Customer/Partner: feedback from customer required, e.g. detailed explanation of requirement
- Has duplicate: if there are Ideas with the same content, they will be linked
- rejected: Idea rejected because e.g. technically hardly/hardly realizable
- implemented: implemented with version XY
Implementation of the ideas
- Average time from submission of the idea to implementation.
- Different functionality from printing over Maptip to administration (WebOffice author)
From which cost share are Ideas implemented?
- depending on the final effort
- WebOffice Ideas offers the possibility to find more interested parties and thus reduce the costs for the individual
Why are Ideas rejected??
- Each rejection is commented/justified by PM/PO
- Different reasons among others
- was already in development planning
- performance-technically not justifiable in the standard
- disproportionately high effort in development/QA
- can be solved otherwise via workarounds