...
- 2011 recommendation: Accessions
- Current recommendation: (not sure users understand or care about accession records; does anyone have evidence one way or the other?) Agreed. Most archives will spawn resource records if they want accessions made discoverable.
- If an institution wants to make accession records publicly available, using something like Unprocessed Material might make it more clear to users what they might find under it. Also it should be noted on the browse listing and record detail page exactly what a user is seeing. —TK
Subjects
- 2011 recommendation: Subjects
- Current recommendation:
- (it is unclear whether users find subject browsing useful from the usability testing; more review and discussion may be required)
...
- 2011 recommendation: Names
- Current recommendation: Keep
- (it is unclear whether users find agent browsing useful from the usability testing; more review and discussion may be required)
- People and Organizations would make it more clear what kind of names are found in this area. —TK
- (it is unclear whether users find agent browsing useful from the usability testing; more review and discussion may be required)
Classifications
- 2011 recommendation: N/A
- Current recommendation: I'm still not sure what this even means, so not sure what to do with this. Repository site map?
- This seems to be functionality that different institutions can use in very different ways, similar to Repositories above.
...
- Recommendation: Administrative Info
- Reasoning: Summary sounds too much like what one would find in an abstract. This information is of little use to archives users, except the identifier.
- Summary of what? I dont think the Admin info (e.g., Descriptive Rules) is helpful for patrons. Keeping collection identifier is a good idea.
Dates
- Recommendation: Keep
Extents
- Recommendation: Physical Size & Scope of Material
- Reasoning: Extents is jargon. By changing the label archives users will know whether or not they care about this info. The priority on the page should be moved down as well.
Agent Links
- Recommendation: Related Persons, Corporations, and Families
- Reasoning: Agent Links is jargon. By adding the word Related we make it more clear that the links here are not to more information about the record the archives users is on, but to a record of an agent.
- Persons, Corporate Bodies, and Families
- or to be less formal People and Corporate Bodies
...
- Recommendation: Description
- Reasoning: Notes is too casual. This is the most important information for someone looking at records.
Instances
- Recommendation: Physical Storage & Digital Access Information
- Reasoning: Instances is unclear. Changing the label makes it clear what the info can be used for. Potentially combine or make adjacent to Extents.
Components
- Recommendation: Child Records / Component Records / Specific Components / Noted Components
- Reasoning: None of the options is ideal, though Inventory from Sue below is better. Components is the right word, but no users understand what that means when they first see it. Something is needed to express the hierarchy and the fact that there is potentially more detailed information in the records below.
- Inventory