What the new May feedback adds
Source: SUNY feedback on the May 2026 demo mockups, seven pages, prepared October 26, 2026. Amrit says he combined earlier demo transcripts using Claude. The PDF describes five May meetings. We already have the full May 21 and May 22 transcripts (S11, S12); the original notes for the other three meetings and the final slide deck are not attached. This PDF is a useful guide to what to check, not independent proof of a final SUNY rule.
What is new to our supplied material
| Reported point | Where | Why it matters now |
|---|---|---|
| The early reviews asked for a non-credit story and worried that campuses might think the shared portal would replace their student systems. | pp. 1–2, 6; sessions S1 and S5 | Explain the shared service and each campus's role without implying that the portal replaces campus systems. |
| The May 20 review wanted a clear route from course results to details before registration, with campus, delivery format, price and section facts in the right places. | pp. 1, 3–4; S2 | This supports the current review of course choice. The October FRD is still the better source for current rules. |
| The May 26 plan kept three landing tiles: Course Catalog, Enrollment Services and Career. It also asked for the campus name, course, dates and meeting pattern on a printable confirmation. | pp. 3, 5; S5 | These are useful questions for the wider service. The current public review has not followed registration through confirmation. |
| The summary reports a later change to the SSN story: the May 26 demo was to call SSN optional for initial collection while security concerns were resolved. | pp. 4, 6–7; S5 | This differs from the required SSN shown for the CNA demo in the May 21 and 22 transcripts. The October FRD instead has conditional SSN and identity alternatives. SUNY must confirm the current rule before a form uses any one version. |
| Campus branding, inquiry recovery without an account, other payment methods, waitlist payment, non-credit progress and chatbot placement were still open in the reported May 26 plan. | pp. 5–7; S5 | Keep these as owner questions. Do not infer an approved design from the old mockup. |
What it repeats or qualifies
- The plain-language changes, non-credit examples, readable footer concern, registration steps, campus payment gateway, course inquiry, four dashboard tabs and multi-course cart debate largely repeat S11 and S12. See PDF pp. 2–6. The summary is not a second independent source for those points.
- The PDF says SUNY accepted the demo deck on May 22 apart from small edits (p. 1). S12 shows positive reactions to specific revisions. Neither source supplies the final May 27 deck or approves the October working prototype.
- The summary says one course at one campus was the May demo's registration story, while several courses and cross-campus payment remained open (pp. 5–6). The newer October FRD permits campus-grouped carts when policy and payment allow. The prototype review therefore still asks which route applies to each offering.
- The PDF says a public visitor could ask a question without an account (pp. 2, 5). That agrees with the October FRD and does not establish that the current prototype's inquiry action works.
Page check
| PDF page | Content checked |
|---|---|
| 1 | Purpose, five-session inventory, provenance and limits |
| 2 | Main feedback themes and first wording changes |
| 3 | Remaining wording changes, landing page and search |
| 4 | Course results and details, registration fields, SSN history |
| 5 | Review, payment, confirmation and inquiry routes |
| 6 | Dashboard, staff-side plan and first open questions |
| 7 | Remaining open questions, named participants and transcript cautions |
Next source to request if a decision depends on this history: the original notes for the first, May 20 and May 26 meetings, plus the final deck shown on May 27. Keep the October FRD and a current SUNY owner answer ahead of this compiled summary when they differ.