Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device.
Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device. Atlassian cookies and tracking notice, (opens new window)
Replicated in sandbox v4.1.1. Recommended to pass the updates to the tooltip language and let UserDocs know the manual should be updated as well. It is concerning to me that patrons using the Aeon plugin could potentially see this information that is intended to be internal (and that I have always assumed is entirely internal), but I am unsure if that is within the scope of this committee.
Replicated in sandbox v4.1.1. Searched for previous related tickets but could not find any. Recommended pass.
Recommend Pass. Will tag UserDocs to for manual update.
Recommend pass. Will pass with language to allow for broader interpretation of ticket re: number of columns to allow.
Could not entirely replicate. When I suppressed the container type for an AO container subrecord, the container type is listed unchanged in view mode except it says “null [indicator]” in the tree. The container type is also not listed as a drop down menu option in edit mode. Need more information.
It makes sense to me that the CUI field is only free text so it is less prescriptive. Recommend passing.
Will follow up (Awaiting more info) Whathappens when you delete controlled value? What’s the difference between suppression vs deletion?
Recommend Pass. Can link to other CUI related ticket via comment.
Confirmed issue. Collection organization page also combines Creators, Sources, and Subjects into a single list, which makes the lack of relators and terms even more confusing. Seems like it’s trying to be a summary but going too far in leaving out important details.
Seems like a reasonable request to me, unless there are data storage issues I’m not thinking of.
This one is a little outside of my wheelhouse. The workflow makes sense to me but I’d like to discuss it with the group for confirmation. If the workflow is valid, then I think the process should be improved.
Recommend Pass. This is a verified bug that leaves the data in a broken state.
Recommend pass. What do we want desired behavior of error handling to be? Popup error that allows override to delete records in use.
This would require a config option that changes the logic of the top_container model. I think we’d have to make changes to the “display_string” and “long_display_string” in TC model. Would scoping this narrowly to only a few places where the display strings are used complicate the logic? For example, we’d still need the original logic for areas of the PUI that aren’t addressed by this ticket?
So long as the ARKs are internal to ASpace, they should be exposed to OAI-PMH. Recommend passing.
I could not replicate the bug as described; instead, the PUI result shows no data at all in the “Found in” field, which is still undesirable behavior. Recommend passing.
Very confusing ticket but I think I figured out what they are talking about and reproduced a failed merge in the Subject Source controlled value list (latest version sandbox). Agree better error messaging would be useful.
Tested, verified that I cannot get a <emph>tag to render properly when nested within a title tag. Nesting is possible using only the <emph> tags, but breaks when enclosing a title. Tested in 3.3.1 and newest version in sandbox