Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 14 Current »

\uD83D\uDDD3 Date

https://lyrasis.zoom.us/j/89240269444?pwd=Mld5cTFSMU9aY3FuY3B2S3liQmRxUT09

\uD83D\uDC65 Participants

\uD83E\uDD45 Goals

\uD83D\uDDE3 Discussion topics

Topic / Who

Tickets

Notes

Decision

Randy Kuehn

  1. ANW-1453 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1546 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. Pass - Typeahead does not adhere to expected behavior

  2. Recommend sending to Usability for input


Matthew Neely

  1. ANW-1542 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1544 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. This appears to be a bug. Recommend passing. Also requests to prevent or allow the subject import should be submitted in a separate ticket.

  2. Ticket is requesting ability to transfer multiple components between resources. I think this would be a good feature if this is technically possible


Daniel Michelson

  1. ANW-1260 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1529 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. Detailed explanation of how to fix this added by Metadata Standards, pass.

  2. This is essentially four vaguely related tickets, recommend closing and asking submitter to resubmit as individual tickets, but here are some specifics:

    1. Item 1: An audit trail for archival objects is desired. This would presumably require significant changes to the application and is neither a usability nor a deaccession issue, so it should be its own ticket.

    2. Item 2: Event records are based on PREMIS, so removal of Deaccession as an option is not possible. It’s not clear to me what is meant by “link to the Deaccession module from this selection.”

    3. Item 3: Deaccessions are not standalone records, so they cannot be linked to multiple records. Event records could be used for this purpose, so it’s not clear to me that this is a necessary feature.

    4. Item 4: Very workflow and situation specific, if this is important to a specific institution, they can consider creating a plugin.

saron tran

  1. ANW-734 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1553 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. looks like i didn’t catch it was a dupe-- but Christine did

  2. pass-- think it’s an okay idea-- but could probably use more finer details--

Angela White

  1. ANW-1523 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1551 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. This makes sense, pass.

  2. I like this and hope it’s possible from a development standpoint. Pass.

Tom Steele

  1. ANW-1525 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1557 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. This is rather a continuation of the date certainty we discussed last meeting. pass.

  1. Since Metadata Standards has discussed this I assume we pass it? Minor priority seems right.

Althea Topek

  1. ANW-833 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  2. ANW-1547 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  1. Tested on Chrome and Safari - can not replicate but the tree jumps to the bottom when the window is small (but stays in place for tree-width adjustment). Close.

  2. Display parallel names in search - pass

✅ Action items

  •  

⤴ Decisions

  • No labels