2023-10-03 Meeting notes

@Matthew Neely / All

Welcome

Work plan presented at joint TAC / UAC meeting.

Update on outreach re: https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1757

@Matt Strauss

https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1766

This first emerged as bug report last year (https://archivesspace.atlassian.net/browse/ANW-1528 ). The concerns about the unclear functionality regarding the functionality of the digital object merge feature were forwarded to User Docs.  A new ticket was created (using basically the same text as the first ticket) to call for an enhanced digital object merge capabilities that would allow users to “to bring together simple objects to create complex one and conversely separate complex ones into simple objects”.  I think this could be a useful feature but am curious to hear the team’s thoughts on this.  If it moves forward, it might need a specification.

Suggest opening new ticket that encompasses only the feature request, along with use cases/specification. When that is complete, would be good to gauged community interest in this. Check in with User Docs to see if action is needed to clarify this function. If ArchivesSpace is not functioning as it should in this regard, submit a separate bug report.

@Tom Steele

This is a strange one. I’ve replicated the bug. It seems to change the heading at the top of the entry, but not the entry itself, so when it appears in a record, it’s still capitalized. Pass.

Pass

@Mattie Clear

With this updated functionality - it would be helpful to be able to bring over agents and subjects associated with the original object. It may also be helpful to have similar functionality to the Archival Object creation where in collection level information is surfaced at the item level if no item level. Additionally, it would be helpful if the citation from the original item was transferred when an archival object is created - currently the system creates a totally new citation without any explicit connection to the original collection. - Draft email for larger feedback for next meeting

Pass ticket. Mattie will draft email for listserv for review at next meeting to gather input on how functionality could be expanded.

@Alexander Duryee (Unlicensed)

The ticket referred to an example on the sandbox, which I verified. There’s a real issue here (imported values don’t have unique mappings) but someone will need to make a feature-level decision about what should happen. Recommend passing (and using the enumeration value, to align with other importers)

Pass.

@Dillon Thomas

Tried to replicate a few times in 3.4.1 and the calculate extents function does not appear to be generating any blank sub records as it did for users in 3.4.0.

n/a

@Bonnie Gordon

Reached out for more information and have not heard back. Need more information about whether the left hand navigation is useful for other users.

Close for now, may revisit if comment is added to ticket.

@Brianna McLaughlin

I am assuming the user is referring to the CSV export from accession browse results. I commented to clarify, but haven’t gotten a response yet. I think the easiest way to solve this would be to add Disposition to a possible accession browse column value in preferences. Recommend commenting to see if the user could just get disposition information from a custom report.

Reply that custom report may solve problem. If so, close this ticket.

@Cory Nimer

As noted in the ticket, this functionality is tied to discussions on multilingual description in the application generally. The Usability Subteam is currently working on this larger issue and it may be useful to wait for their report before moving forward. With this particular request, there are some issues with data exports as well as PUI display that should be addressed in a more detailed specification.

Awaiting more information for specification on implementation. Related activity is occurring on the linked ticket.

@Matthew Neely

Tested in the admin and repository settings and clear that the "create/update/delete vocabulary records" does not replicate "create/update/delete controlled value records" permission setting. The "create/update/delete vocabulary records" setting does appear to be obsolete and not granting any permission to change controlled value lists. Recommending passing.

Pass.

@Keli Schmid

n/a