Please provide documentation for "early adopter features" - like Dataexplorer "code"

[r_weber]

Hello,

I like testing new early adopter features, it's a great way to get a peek what's coming. But PLEASE to allow us doing so also release - at least rudimentary - documentation at the same time as new features are available. Either in the product itself or in the official documentation (marked as early adopter as well).

Otherwise providing feedback and test-driving becomes a frustrating experience....

For example, in the new "code" tab of the data explorer - seems powerful! But what is a BINARYCRITERION, ... where is the documentation or autocompletion?

Thanks,

Reinhard

[david_lopes · Accepted solution]

The message is indeed a little crypt because it is early adopter, but also remember that you are just building a Metrics V2 API query there, so you can follow the documentation that is pretty extensive here:

https://www.dynatrace.com/support/help/shortlink/api-metrics-v2-selector#conditions

For instance, a filter transformation needs a criteria (prefix, ne, eq, remainer, etc), which you are missing, it just so happen that we are exposing these weird internal names instead of a friendly message for now.

[ct_27]

Working on a custom metric and needed to use DataExplorer Code but needed documentation to figure out what I can and cannot do.  Searched the internet for 20 minutes then came here to search the forum because I know I had seen something in the past.   The link above gets me to what I need but it should have been much easier to find this information.

Thus I agree with @r_weber on this.  Every Early Adopter feature should have a link on that features page in DT that links you to a special post, blog, help document that assists the user in knowing how to use the new Early Adopter feature.

I feel this is important because your developers have spent hundreds of hours building these features, you're not going to get great adoption if you can't teach the community how to use it.

[Karolina_Linda]

Thank you @r_weber and @ct_27 for this important feedback! I'm forwarding it right away to the Documentation team.