Date range parameters (and others) are possible for at least some of the reports. Ability to select sort method seems low-level need. Ticket is very generally phrased. Rec: close.
Seems reasonable to move publish button up on Accession record. Rec: pass.
Original accessions specification link doesn’t work. Any reason not to add to DO records? Remove from CSV accessions import or just change the label so that it no longer says “not populated by imports”? Recommend adding that when an accession record is spawned, the Repository Processing Note field should populate in the Resource rec. Rec: pass.
Recommendation: Community development /Send to Usability Possibly add mode similar to "Enable Reorder Mode" to incorporate a "publish selected" option
Recommendation: Correct ordered list display in PUI & PDFs Findings: (general note tested v2.7.1) Ordered & unordered lists appear as unordered lists in PUI Ordered list does not appear as ordered or unordered list in PDF Unordered list appears properly in PDF Related to https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-275
Recommendation: Need more information Questions: Is there a specific reason the related links need to be associated with a note? Would the addition of a "Related Resources" field similar to the "Related Accessions" field resolve the issue?
The submitter and I discussed this in the comments earlier this year and found that the correct order of the subfields varies depending on content. Since there is no encoding to indicate this, he agreed that the ticket should be closed.
The silent omission of finding aid notes that are in the “Additional Description” category from the collection organization view is a serious flaw in the current PUI. I recommend increasing the priority to critical and passing for ready for implementation. While I strongly support eliminating the “Additional Description” category, that would have a major impact on other views, so until then, making the notes display would be sufficient.
This ticket asks for the ability to have different controlled value lists for individual repositories. If we take this to mean only customizing the display of options, rather than the values, I think this would be a useful, if not particularly important, feature. I’m imagining something like the existing ability to suppress values, but scoped to an individual repository. If this is technically feasible, passing it with a priority of trivial seems reasonable.
This ticket has a lot of viewers (5). Selfishly, I would like this ticket to pass. I don’t think the community really engages in the Jira system, so we haven’t received any interaction on this ticket, besides these watchers, but I do think that this is getting at a desire to be able to compile records created or updated by a certain person. I’m not sure how it would work if a record is updated by someone else (if it would also stop showing up as “stats” for the earlier person, for example).
Selfishly, I would like this to pass, but I don’t know how this would work with multiple languages.
Update 6/10: it looks like it is half-fixed so far. You still have to click specifically on the textured side area for the particular archival object (do we want that or not?), but now you can click and drag-and-drop it anywhere. If clicking only in the textured area is ok (is that accessible, I’m not sure), than it could be closed. If it would preferable to be able to click anywhere on the AO line to select it, than we should pass it (in my opinion).