Topic/Who | Tickets | Notes | Decision |
|---|
Maggie Hughes
| https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-281 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-336 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-795
| Would require allowing more than one pdf to be selected from New Background Job>Generate PDF. Seems do-able. Seems like it would be useful but I’m not sure how much interest/demand there is for this. Priority is minor. Would be great for users. Seems broadly sketched out Mark, some details might be missing. Can it pass as is? Rec: pass ticket to solve immediate issue – warn that a Subject/Agent rec is used in other repos before deleting.
| Close - with message reopen if more interest arrises Awaiting more info - needs a full spec to move further Push - include warning including specific repository using resource
|
Randy Kuehn | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-960 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-999 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1080 Could this
| Recommend following Usability Team’s suggestion: “Usability sub-team has discussed this ticket and recommend moving the Physical Storage Information field to above the fold/expand all section of the overview for each record“
Although, it might be cleaner to have the multiple container text linked in a way that scrolls down the page and expands the physical location section. Possible dupe:
https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-563 Could be resolved with the rich text editor recommendation for the notes fields?I’m a bit conflicted on this one. I would typically recommend adding a custom plugin with a line (above) and/or a gem such as rinku (https://rubygems.org/gems/rinku/versions/2.0.6) Recommend:
Either - Adding a local plugin with a couple lines of jQuery to modify the welcome page. However, since custom plugins might not be an available to everyone, maybe additional options could be
Or - Additional options added to the config for the advanced search form (customize selected: limits dropdown & keyword dropdown).
| Push - for component records Close - dupe / add notes Push - community development
|
Angela White | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1062 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-942 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1096
| This ticket wants to rename “Repository Processing Note” to “Internal Repository Note,” make it indexable, and be able to run reports for repository notes. This would certainly add some functionality, but I’m not sure that this is a high-priority set of changes. I’m unclear how other institutions use this note--at mine, we don’t really use it at all. This ticket seeks to have a “suppressed” indicator in the record tree in the staff interface. Currently, this is only visible within the resource record when you’ve clicked on a suppressed record (or through search results). This seems like an easy fix to make complex collections more easy to navigate in the staff interface. This ticket asks for visible deaccession records in the PUI in the same way that accessions can appear. I imagine it would be fairly simple to add a “publish” checkbox to the deaccession part of the accession record? If so, this is worthwhile to consider. I’m not sure that this deserves high priority unless it’s truly simple to accomplish. Most institutions I know using ASpace don’t display their accessions in the PUI; though my institution does, I don’t think I’d want the deaccessions to display.
|
|
Daniel Michelson | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1000 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-966 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1064 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-271
| 1 and 2. Both of these tickets concern spellcheck, a highly popular feature that exists only in a very limited way in ArchivesSpace. The current functionality is to utilize the web browser’s built-in spellcheck. However, as the second ticket points out, ArchivesSpace does not tell the browser to check spelling in the content field of resource record notes. Correcting that should be simple and I recommend passing as is. The first ticket is looking for a completely new function, being able to search the entire database or a single resource record to detect spelling errors. At an earlier Dev/Pri meeting we were leaning towards passing this for development as a plugin. 3. This ticket is asking for the order of elements in the collection overview page of the PUI to be customizable via the config file. This would be a nice feature. My only concern is whether this should be dealt with as part of a larger conversation about eliminating (or making optional) the “Additional Description” section. 4. This can be closed as a duplicate of the previous ticket. | Push - community development Push - Lora pointed out that the current needs may need to be assessed Waiting more information - Needs specification to start building requirements Close - dupe
|
Matthew Neely | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-328 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1090 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-940
| This ticket is requesting bulk edit functionality to manage controlled lists. Currently list values can be merged but only one term at a time. The ability to merge multiple terms concurrently would be very beneficial for institutions undertaking large scale migration and data cleaning projects. The ticket also requests two changes to the delete functionality for managing controlled lists. The first is for the ability to select and delete multiple values at the same time and this does seem a worthwhile improvement. The second is to be able to delete suppressed terms without having to unsuppress them. Would require the delete option to remain visible when a term has been suppressed and this would seem a good idea, especially if it could be combined with the ability to delete multiple values concurrently. This ticket is requesting the ability to generate detailed reports on subjects, combining current functionality into one report. This would require a report capable of listing all subject terms used, the number and details of resources linked to that subject, as well as an overview of subject sources and types. This is currently only available by looking at each subject term individually. I think there would be benefit in having this functionality, and it could be perhaps applied to other reports such as on Agents, and it would add collection and metadata management. It is worth considering but I’m not clear on how much technical work would be required to achieve this. This ticket, as far as I can understand, is seeking functionality to link existing box descriptions in Resources to locations and containers using a bulk functionality. At present box descriptions can only be linked one at a time via Instances. I think this would be very useful for collection and location management.
| Dev will investigate - may need additional info Pass - community Development
|
Althea Topek | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1092 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1023 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1041
| Agents, Subjects, and Top Containers are the only functions that allow Browse and Create. If a Create option was added to Related Accession, should it also be added to: related resources, classification, and location? I don’t think Extent Dimension should be a controlled value but there should be a way to set Width as a default Project for usability subteam?
|
|
saron tran | https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1059 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1049 https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-715
| I like the idea and seems like low hanging fruit. I think the suggested place to put the link to a static page is a decent place (compared to the ‘browse’ or ‘create’ drop down menus. I wonder if another good place might be on the import page itself (and maybe less work)? I checked the cog wheel > manage groups > create group and did not see existing user group management configurability of ‘publish’. I could see how it would be good to have certain groups of users who do the initial draft and then have someone like an editor be the one to actually publish the resource. I’m not sure on this one but is this request attainable with the AppConfig[solr_params] configuration?
|
|