Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-1285 |
---|
|
| pass who owns the accession import template? is Anne’s comment from July enough of a specification? Comment - ask Lora if the solution is a wrap around
| Pass Pass Pass Usability to recommend best practice
|
Brian Hoffman (Unlicensed) | Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-1547 |
---|
|
|
| Awaiting more information.
|
Tom Steele | Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-656 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-435 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-531 |
---|
|
| no comment really, it is labeled awaiting further information. What information do we need?
I believe this one is asking for EAC-CPF to be an export option. Pass.
This indeed is a problem. I did test out of curiosity if merging records can also duplicate subjects/agents (merging two agents attached to a resource did not create two identical links). Merits further discussion about the application of the uniqueness constraint.
| Refer to Metadata standards Close. They are plugins that can do this.
|
Keli Schmid | Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-436 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-1427 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-31 |
---|
|
| | |
Daniel Michelson | Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-504 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-775 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-346 |
---|
|
| At a recent meeting, we’d decided to close this ticket as being resolved by ANW-1095, but Kevin Schlottmann pointed out that ANW-1095 does not address the MARC compatibility issue. I recommend passing this ticket as allowing the agent link for creators to be designated as primary to support MARC import/export. Also, as either part of this ticket or as a separate ticket, the EAD export should be changed to have all creators included in the origination field in line with ANW-1095. This ticket wants agents and subjects alphabetized in the PUI and in exports. This seems helpful, but it is necessary to implement ANW-504 first to avoid breaking MARC compatibility. This ticket wants to limit the ability to share certain information between repositories designated repositories to support multi-institution installations. In this (now outdated) example, an installation with five repositories would have three of the repositories sharing certain portions of agent records (such as contacts), but the others would not share that information (except under certain unclear circumstances). The complexities of attempting such work seem quite daunting and the original authors of the request (Smith, Mount Holyoke, and Hampshire Colleges) are no longer planning a multi-institution installation, so I recommend closing the ticket.
| |
Matthew Neely | Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-121 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-1558 |
---|
|
Jira Legacy |
---|
server | System JIRA |
---|
serverId | 36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f |
---|
key | ANW-195 |
---|
|
| Ticket requesting functionality for admin user to be able to suppress fields in the SUI not included in an institution’s metadata schema. This ticket was previously discussed at Dev Pri in 2020. I think there is merit in this but I recall that discussions at the time suggested that this could be addressed by training and metadata documentation. I do think there would be usability benefits in being able to customise fields to only those required by an institution. This ticket is seeking a report to be generated on all imported record types (EAD, MARC etc). The report would indicate which elements, with their values, have been imported. Ticket was created by Metadata Standards who have also offered to provide further examples and input. Suggest asking Metadata Standards for a specification? Ticket requesting ability for the Digital Object template to have multiple agents/subujects imported with a DO. Currently only does 1. Comments have suggested other paths for importing DOs with multiple subjects. Suggest community development?
| |