...
Who | Item | Notes | Decision | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Announcements? | |||||||||||
Fast Track |
| simple PUI label: PASS | pass | ||||||||
Fast Track |
| simple PUI label: PASS | pass | ||||||||
Fast Track |
| simple PUI label: PASS | pass | ||||||||
|
| Rec: Unable to further test but this should pass. It seems like description has a solution to the issue that might catch all/most fields. |
| ||||||||
Edgar |
| Rec: There isn’t a bulk export of XML within core as far as I can see. We have a 20MB EAD when exported and have been able to export many times, but had issue prior to v2.1. That said, this could be an issue in the future for large records. I would recommend passing if we could add a separate background job export option along with the regular export for trouble records. Otherwise, this issue was technically completed when it was done for PDF. | Awaiting More Information | ||||||||
Edgar |
| Rec: Pass using Mark Cooper’s notes about linking using database associations instead of the search functionality. | Pass | ||||||||
Julia | Limit RDE: ANW-522 | ||||||||||
Julia | Archival Objects advancing bug ANW-736 | ||||||||||
Julia | Physical Storage info in Resource tree? ANW-301 | ||||||||||
Maggie | [from earlier] Boolean technicality https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-171 | Rec: Unable to confirm myself, but pass with Laney’s notes | Awaiting more info | ||||||||
Maggie | [from earlier] See all records created by particular user: ANW-744 | Rec: Pass | Awaiting more info | ||||||||
Maggie |
| Can confirm that this is still an issue. User guide doesn’t include info on importing subjects via LCNAF plugin. Add this to ticket? Rec: Pass | pass; emailed Kevin Clair re user guide and importing subjects | ||||||||
Laney/Lora |
| Rec: Close Won’t do | Close | ||||||||
Laney/Lora |
| pass to stop automatically mapping to the optional caption field | |||||||||
Terra | Events: ANW-358 | Still awaiting more info? I’m not really sure what the issue is/what user is asking for… | Awaiting more info - seeking more community input on whether this is a wider issue/priority | ||||||||
Terra | Events 2: ANW-509 | Tried to recreate issue, but am not able to create a new event. Getting an error: Event Date/Time - must specify either a date or a timestamp UTC Timestamp - must specify either a date or a timestamp. Rec: pass (if issue still exists) | wide spread errors within events Awaiting More Info - Christine will explore | ||||||||
Terra |
| Recreated in sandbox and don’t see any Notes repeating in newest version. Rec: close? | Close | ||||||||
Alicia |
| close - duplicate in favor of ANW-561 | |||||||||
Alicia |
| Could not replicate in 2.4.1 | close | ||||||||
Alicia |
| Awaiting More Information | |||||||||
Lydia |
| Added specs, which are also in SIEWG recs. Question is whether Subjects and Agents should be linked to Archival Components, not just collection-level record? It makes sense for Digital Objects, but I am unsure about Series, Files, and Items, etc. Awaiting more info/community input. | Awaiting More Information | ||||||||
Lydia |
| This ticket is really old and doesn’t have any specs. There is not enough info to move it forward. Notified both Dallas and Kevin for Technical and User Documentation. Rec: Close | Closed | ||||||||
Lydia |
| This ticket is old and I haven’t been able to get an answer about what it is actually suggesting. I recommend closing this ticket since the respondents haven’t replied since April, which doesn’t demonstrate a lot of interest in the ticket issue. | Closed | ||||||||
Lydia |
| Having a hard limit of RDE of 50 lines (as Mark suggested) sounds like a good idea to me, especially since there isn’t a confirmation click-through whenever the window is closed. (That confirmation window is much needed!) Rec: pass | close - Lydia will comment about why see https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-391 for RDE confirmation issue | ||||||||
Patrick |
| Unable to replicate and original reporter is no longer able to replicate. Rec: close | close | ||||||||
Patrick |
| Not an error. Two fields are different. Agreed with Mark Custer's interpretation of this. Location barcodes are for identifying physical location units, whereas the containers are for individual containers like a box. Rec: Some better control of Location barcodes could be helpful though. Either through suppression or forced uniqueness. | close | ||||||||
Patrick |
| Dave Mayo has explained the situation well and a solution. Can confirm and replicate the behavior. Rec: pass | Pass | ||||||||
William | [Lydia: Is this already done?]
| ||||||||||
William |
| ||||||||||
William |
|
...