talk@lists.collectionspace.org
WE HAVE SUNSET THIS LISTSERV - Join us at collectionspace@lyrasislists.org
View all threadscollectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further changes to Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including version 2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
Regards,
Chris
Chris -
Repeatable sub-fields is one of the items that is not currently on the
road map, but it is part of our current prioritization exercise. If
enough people mark it as a must have, we will consider shuffling the
roadmap to accommodate it.
If the core project team doesn't work on it, the odds are good that it
will be developed as part of an implementation (hint, hint).
-Megan
From: talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org
[mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] On Behalf Of Christopher
Pott
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 9:34 AM
To: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further changes to
Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including version
2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the
link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Rep
eatable+Fields+%28Dimension%2C+Title%2C+Date%29#Wireframes-RepeatableFie
lds%28Dimension%2CTitle%2CDate%29-RepeatablesubfieldsTitle
Regards,
Chris
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
/Chris
Fra: Forbes, Megan [mailto:mforbes@movingimage.us]
Sendt: 1. marts 2011 16:33
Til: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: RE: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Chris -
Repeatable sub-fields is one of the items that is not currently on the
road map, but it is part of our current prioritization exercise. If
enough people mark it as a must have, we will consider shuffling the
roadmap to accommodate it.
If the core project team doesn't work on it, the odds are good that it
will be developed as part of an implementation (hint, hint).
-Megan
From: talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org
[mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] On Behalf Of Christopher
Pott
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 9:34 AM
To: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further changes to
Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including version
2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the
link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Rep
eatable+Fields+%28Dimension%2C+Title%2C+Date%29#Wireframes-RepeatableFie
lds%28Dimension%2CTitle%2CDate%29-RepeatablesubfieldsTitle
Regards,
Chris
interestingly if the repeatable group was modelled as a separate service
like the person/contact relationship where you can (untested but
technically the code is mostly there in the App) associate multiple
contact services with an individual person then this code already exists
or at least is potentially there for authorities (working on the
procedure code at the moment for the media/blob relationship).
If this isn't being modelled as a seperate service then you would need
to discuss with the service layer what structure and model would work
for them. But as long as it requires the xml payloads in same structure
just with added nesting then there shouldn't need to be any added
complexity in the app as (once again untested) it should support
recursive structures. However, I suspect you might need to tweak the
UIschema if it needs a different type of expander or a different
internal reference to field or $(row). But once again that isn't that
difficult from an App point of view.
If you do work on this please keep me in the loop as it a) sounds
interesting and b) would be interesting to confirm whether some of the
richness of the App which has been put in a bit blindly will actually
support the initial dream.
Chris
On 01/03/2011 21:02, Christopher Pott wrote:
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
/Chris
*Fra:*Forbes, Megan [mailto:mforbes@movingimage.us]
Sendt: 1. marts 2011 16:33
Til: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: RE: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Chris --
Repeatable sub-fields is one of the items that is not currently on the
road map, but it is part of our current prioritization exercise. If
enough people mark it as a must have, we will consider shuffling the
roadmap to accommodate it.
If the core project team doesn't work on it, the odds are good that it
will be developed as part of an implementation (hint, hint).
-Megan
*From:*talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org
[mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] *On Behalf Of
*Christopher Pott
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 9:34 AM
To: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further changes to
Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including version
2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the
link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
Regards,
Chris
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Hi Chris,
I must confess I can't shed much light on the best way to model this. I'd definately need some input from Services on this.
In any case your comments sound encouraging, and don't worry, if I work in this I'll need everyone possible in the loop :-)
/Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Martin [mailto:csm22@caret.cam.ac.uk]
Sent: Wed 3/2/2011 10:53 AM
To: Christopher Pott
Cc: Forbes, Megan; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: Re: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
interestingly if the repeatable group was modelled as a separate service
like the person/contact relationship where you can (untested but
technically the code is mostly there in the App) associate multiple
contact services with an individual person then this code already exists
or at least is potentially there for authorities (working on the
procedure code at the moment for the media/blob relationship).
If this isn't being modelled as a seperate service then you would need
to discuss with the service layer what structure and model would work
for them. But as long as it requires the xml payloads in same structure
just with added nesting then there shouldn't need to be any added
complexity in the app as (once again untested) it should support
recursive structures. However, I suspect you might need to tweak the
UIschema if it needs a different type of expander or a different
internal reference to field or $(row). But once again that isn't that
difficult from an App point of view.
If you do work on this please keep me in the loop as it a) sounds
interesting and b) would be interesting to confirm whether some of the
richness of the App which has been put in a bit blindly will actually
support the initial dream.
Chris
On 01/03/2011 21:02, Christopher Pott wrote:
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
/Chris
*Fra:*Forbes, Megan [mailto:mforbes@movingimage.us]
Sendt: 1. marts 2011 16:33
Til: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: RE: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Chris --
Repeatable sub-fields is one of the items that is not currently on the
road map, but it is part of our current prioritization exercise. If
enough people mark it as a must have, we will consider shuffling the
roadmap to accommodate it.
If the core project team doesn't work on it, the odds are good that it
will be developed as part of an implementation (hint, hint).
-Megan
*From:*talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org
[mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] *On Behalf Of
*Christopher Pott
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 9:34 AM
To: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further changes to
Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including version
2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the
link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
Regards,
Chris
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Chris and Chris,
Thanks for the lively conversation and ideas about how we might
address this issue of repeatability.
Seems to me that this issue will also be raised in the context of the
IMLS work some implementers are involved in. I'd like to suggest that
we schedule a STIM at some point in the near future to talk about the
options that Chris M. suggests in anticipation of both SMK's needs and
IMLS implementer needs this calendar year.
Angela
On Mar 2, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Christopher Pott wrote:
Hi Chris,
I must confess I can't shed much light on the best way to model
this. I'd definately need some input from Services on this.
In any case your comments sound encouraging, and don't worry, if I
work in this I'll need everyone possible in the loop :-)
/Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Martin [mailto:csm22@caret.cam.ac.uk]
Sent: Wed 3/2/2011 10:53 AM
To: Christopher Pott
Cc: Forbes, Megan; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: Re: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
interestingly if the repeatable group was modelled as a separate
service
like the person/contact relationship where you can (untested but
technically the code is mostly there in the App) associate multiple
contact services with an individual person then this code already
exists
or at least is potentially there for authorities (working on the
procedure code at the moment for the media/blob relationship).
If this isn't being modelled as a seperate service then you would need
to discuss with the service layer what structure and model would work
for them. But as long as it requires the xml payloads in same
structure
just with added nesting then there shouldn't need to be any added
complexity in the app as (once again untested) it should support
recursive structures. However, I suspect you might need to tweak the
UIschema if it needs a different type of expander or a different
internal reference to field or $(row). But once again that isn't that
difficult from an App point of view.
If you do work on this please keep me in the loop as it a) sounds
interesting and b) would be interesting to confirm whether some of the
richness of the App which has been put in a bit blindly will actually
support the initial dream.
Chris
On 01/03/2011 21:02, Christopher Pott wrote:
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
/Chris
*Fra:*Forbes, Megan [mailto:mforbes@movingimage.us]
Sendt: 1. marts 2011 16:33
Til: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: RE: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Chris --
Repeatable sub-fields is one of the items that is not currently on
the
road map, but it is part of our current prioritization exercise. If
enough people mark it as a must have, we will consider shuffling the
roadmap to accommodate it.
If the core project team doesn't work on it, the odds are good
that it
will be developed as part of an implementation (hint, hint).
-Megan
*From:*talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org
[mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] *On Behalf Of
*Christopher Pott
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 9:34 AM
To: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Subject: [Talk] collectionobject title and dimension
Hi all,
Could anyone tell me if there are any plans to make further
changes to
Collectionobject 'title' and 'dimension' before and including
version
2.0, especially whether they will be implemented as described in the
link below (ie.containing repeatable sub-fields):
Regards,
Chris
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org