Hi, (CC'ing the list again)
On Do, 2014-07-17 at 15:16 +1200, Clemens wrote: > thanks for the quick response and thanks for SDAPS! Think its not a big > problem for us at the moment, we use radio tick boxes for single choice > and rectangular boxes for multi choice questions and trust our students > to answer them correctly... > > Would also be cool if SDAPS could support these features: > - Define what to do if an invalid answer is given, e.g., ignore the > current question, section or the whole questionnaire. > - Branches: if a certain question has a certain answer some sections are > ignored. For example, "Do you have a mobile device?" YES -> go to the > next section, NO -> finish questionnaire and ignore the following sections. I kind of doubt that it makes sense to support this kind of data analysis inside SDAPS itself. There are some reasons for this: * Often people will use other tools anyways (e.g. R) * For me the focus is on data input, not data analysis * Supporting this would require metadata that cannot be properly embedded inside a LaTeX document That said; there are some plans[1] to develop a description format for questionnaires. It probably makes sense to support these kind of constructs in such a file. Benjamin [1] http://sdaps.org/Future
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
