Hello, implementers of CollectionSpace!

I just wanted to keep you up to date on the current design thinking
around primary and secondary tabs. We are particularly interested in
hearing about the user's perspective and would like to encourage any
feedback from our implementers.

First of all, here are what we are referring to as primary and
secondary tabs:

Primary tab: The tab that display the schema for the current record.
e.g. If you are in an acquisition record AC001.001.002, then the
schema for AC001.001.002 is displayed in the primary tab.
Secondary tabs: The rest of the tabs that contain a list of the
related procedural records and their schemas. e.g. In the Location &
Movement tab of AC001.001.002, any Location & Movement records related
to the acquisition record are listed, and the schema for each can be
viewed or edited.

There's been a couple of concerns raised regarding the tabs:

Is the primary tab always placed on the far left or are the tabs fixed
in a certain order (meaning the primary tab could be anywhere)?
CSPACE-1277
Should relating a procedural record to other procedural records of the
same type be allowed (e.g. intake to intake)?

The recent design to address these concerns is as follows:

The primary tab stays on the far left and is visually distinguished
(larger than the rest of the tabs).
The secondary tabs are ordered alphabetically and appear the same on
every type of record pages. This ensures a tab for the related records
of the same type as the current record (e.g. an intake record will get
a "related intake records" tab).
The active tab will be highlighted in white.

This design is shown in these wireframes:
http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Acquisition
http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Object+tab

The problem with this design is that there are two tabs of the same
name (one being primary, one being related/secondary) on any given
record page. Here are the options I've considered to resolve this issue:
http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Tabs

Please have a look and let me know what your thoughts are!
Feel free to respond to this thread or leave your comments on the
wiki. :)

Erin

SMK is ready to give our respond, attached picture

We prefer approach 3 and 4 combined: The 'current record' tab (and no moving tabs). And with the number of related records shown on every sub-tab

We recommend change in the header. It will be easier to know and see where you are.

Kirsten

Fra: talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Erin Yu
Sendt: 6. maj 2010 20:45
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: [Talk] your feedback on Primary & Secondary Tabs

Hello, implementers of CollectionSpace!

I just wanted to keep you up to date on the current design thinking around primary and secondary tabs. We are particularly interested in hearing about the user's perspective and would like to encourage any feedback from our implementers.

First of all, here are what we are referring to as primary and secondary tabs:

• Primary tab: The tab that display the schema for the current record. e.g. If you are in an acquisition record AC001.001.002, then the schema for AC001.001.002 is displayed in the primary tab.
• Secondary tabs: The rest of the tabs that contain a list of the related procedural records and their schemas. e.g. In the Location & Movement tab of AC001.001.002, any Location & Movement records related to the acquisition record are listed, and the schema for each can be viewed or edited.

There's been a couple of concerns raised regarding the tabs:

• Is the primary tab always placed on the far left or are the tabs fixed in a certain order (meaning the primary tab could be anywhere)? CSPACE-1277 http://issues.collectionspace.org/browse/CSPACE-1277
• Should relating a procedural record to other procedural records of the same type be allowed (e.g. intake to intake)?

The recent design to address these concerns is as follows:

• The primary tab stays on the far left and is visually distinguished (larger than the rest of the tabs).
• The secondary tabs are ordered alphabetically and appear the same on every type of record pages. This ensures a tab for the related records of the same type as the current record (e.g. an intake record will get a "related intake records" tab).
• The active tab will be highlighted in white.

This design is shown in these wireframes:

http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Acquisition

http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Object+tab

The problem with this design is that there are two tabs of the same name (one being primary, one being related/secondary) on any given record page. Here are the options I've considered to resolve this issue:

http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Wireframes+-+Tabs

Please have a look and let me know what your thoughts are!

Feel free to respond to this thread or leave your comments on the wiki. :)

Erin