...
- Jargon such as "Digital Objects", "Accessions", "Classifications". I don't think folks outside of the archives/ library professional sphere know what this means. For example in the military, "Classification" means something entirely different. (yes, we need sensible defaults in ALL of these categories!)
- Location of container list tree at very bottom of page and default of collapsed view (when tree has a hierarchy); hard to find, confusing to use.
- Relationship of container list tree to individual components; when a file (for example) is clicked on, the page you are redirected to feels like a dead end (and layout of information on this page is confusing); even with the breadcrumb trail, the context of this page within the larger Resource Record is confusing.
- When instances are added at the Resource Record level on the staff side, there is not a way to suppress these from view on the PUI; these then appear above the container list tree, dominate the entire record view (more confusion), and make public some info (such as shelving locations) that may be preferred to not be published.
- Search results are returned in an unclear order, difficult to locate anything specific via searching.
- Search results include components, but without any context- the collection they are part of is buried within lists of folder titles, sometimes pages later. Also, it's common for archival objects in different collections to have the same name (consider the term "scrapbook"), and without any context, users can't immediately tell the difference between 10 sequential results for "scrapbook."
- Relationship between left-hand facets and results displayed–often not accurate (i.e. clicking on some facets does not limit results displayed to only those results related to that facet–example: selecting a facet for a repository displays results from other repositories in addition to the one clicked on)
- In main horizontal navigation bar, choices that do not have anything published on the staff side still appear as options (i.e. if no Accession are marked as published, Accessions still appears as an option)
- Also, accessions were not available through the public interface in Archon, but when they were imported they became public in ArchivesSpace. If users find them in both places, they are going to be confused as to which record to look at.
- "Include components" checkbox above the facets has no context; non-staff users will generally not understand what this means or why/when/etc. to use it.
- The Sort order option of "Record Type" is meaningless to users.
- There is no way to know if a keyword search searches all areas of a resource record (notes, components, instances, etc.). Seconded!!! We discovered, for instance, that everything in the JSON record is searched, including things like the "lock_version" and other database ids, which make searching for number nigh but impossible.
- The inability to easily unpublish a record, e.g. if a finding aid is being updated, there is no way to "hide" it while changes are being made. This could end up being confusing for users.
- Users cannot browse alphabetically with any ease, though those used to Archon may expect to be able to.
- There is no "Help" for users.
- Too many clicks to get to the actual image digital object
...