[UIREQ-81] Request detail and Edit request screens - item details Created: 17/Apr/18  Updated: 27/Jan/20  Resolved: 19/Jun/18

Status: Closed
Project: ui-requests
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: None

Type: Bug Priority: P3
Reporter: Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) Assignee: Matt Connolly
Resolution: Done Votes: 0
Labels: requests, sprint36, sprint37, sprint38, sprint39
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: 1 hour
Original estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: JPEG File Item Detail Record - Interesting Times.JPG     JPEG File Loan Detail Record - Interesting Times.JPG     JPEG File Request Detail Record - Interesting Times.JPG     PNG File Skärmavbild 2018-05-03 kl. 12.14.36.png    
Issue links:
Relates
relates to MODGQL-21 Support item query that returns holdi... Closed
relates to UIREQ-64 Refine Request record layout (Edit an... Closed
Sprint:

 Description   

Overview: Request detail and Edit request screens have a few display problems

Steps to Reproduce:

Log into FOLIO-snapshot-stable as diku_admin
Click Requests to go to the requests list
Click one of the requests to go into the Request detail or Edit request screen

#Scenario
Expected results: screens should display item details such as call number, copy number, etc.
Actual results: no item details displayed except barcode.



 Comments   
Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 18/Apr/18 ]

Assigning to Tania Fersenheim, as I'm not sure whether these are bugs or by design.

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 18/Apr/18 ]

Nevermind! Should have looked at the screenshots first. These are pretty clearly bugs. I'll put this in the sprint backlog.

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 03/May/18 ]

Cate Boerema, scenario 1 is a change from UIREQ-64 Closed , which specified "Author". In the screenshot of the loan details page, the field is labeled "Contributor*s*". Is there an expectation that more than one name might appear in that field? (Since I see that it is "Contributor" in instances, I'll assume that that form is correct for the time being.)

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 03/May/18 ]

Also, could you please specify where the values for volume and copy should be taken from? I don't see those fields defined in the schemas for items, instances, or holdings. (The item record does have a pieceIdentifiers component, the values of which look like copy numbers. Is that the same thing?

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 03/May/18 ]

scenario 1 is a change from UIREQ-64 Closed , which specified "Author"

We no longer have a notion of Author. We have a list of Contributors at the item record and they have a Name type (e.g. personal name, corporate name) and a Type ( e.g. Composer, Performer) and a primary indicator. We could do what we have done on Loans, which is list all the contributors. That would be nice in that it is consistent. But I am not sure if that is most useful in the context of Requests. Tania Fersenheim will need to let us know what is expected here.

On a related note, Charlotte Whitt, I'm curious, where do the contributor "Types" come from? Will there be an Author type?

Also, could you please specify where the values for volume and copy should be taken from? I don't see those fields defined in the schemas for items, instances, or holdings. (The item record does have a pieceIdentifiers component, the values of which look like copy numbers. Is that the same thing?

Tania Fersenheim or Charlotte Whitt can probably answer this question.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/May/18 ]

> I'm curious, where do the contributor "Types" come from? Will there be an Author type?

Hi Cate Boerema - Contributor types will be based on an upload of the MARC relator term list - see: https://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaterm.html and UIIN-149; FOLIO-1203 Closed

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 03/May/18 ]

Thanks Charlotte Whitt. I suppose there could be quite a lot of contributors for a given record. If it is overwhelming for users, I guess we could just display the primary instead of all. Anyway, I'll leave this to Tania Fersenheim and Emma Boettcher to work out with the SMEs.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/May/18 ]

Hi Matt Connolly - In Inventory the values for volume and copy are already implemented with the alpha release:

  • volume: is set in the item records metadata element labeled Enumeration - e.g.: 2 v.
  • copy: is set in the item record's metadata element labeled Piece identifier - e.g. “copy 3”

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 03/May/18 ]

Hi, Former user. In the request detail wireframes (and attached screenshot), there are separate fields for volume and enumeration. If volume is taken from the enumeration element in the metadata, how is that different from the enumeration field in the UI?

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/May/18 ]

Hi Matt Connolly, not sure I understand your question. Shouldn't it be exactly the same

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 03/May/18 ]

I guess that's my question – are volume and enumeration always exactly the same value? And if so, why do we display the same value under two different names side by side?

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 03/May/18 ]

Matt Connolly - The initial design of the volume, enum, chron etc came from the RA SIG. In some systems the Volume in the item record is included in or derived from enumeration, and in others it is a separate data element. If FOLIO does not store a separate value for Volume, then perhaps only enumeration is needed. We should have someone weigh in who is expert in enumeration and its multiple levels and how those might translate on the screen intelligibly to staff. That person is not me!

In Charlotte Whitt's comment "volume: is set in the item records metadata element labeled Enumeration - e.g.: 2 v." - is this saying that the enumeration is "2 volumes" or "Volume 2" because those data are not identical.

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 03/May/18 ]

Contributor - I do not think it would be helpful to include multiple contributors on the Request Detail page. If staff need more complete bib data they can skip over to the item/instance/bib

I will take the question of including the primary contributor to the SIG. How is the primary contributor defined in FOLIO?

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 03/May/18 ]

In the MARC world there are 6 (I think) levels of enumeration. Only one of those might be volume, correct? If so, does FOLIO handle the current idea of multiple levels of enumeration, and how might that translate to a "volume" when displaying item info?

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/May/18 ]

Oh, got it!

I guess Tania Fersenheim can better answer for why she has both 'Volume' and 'Enumeration' on the wireframe for Request Detail Record. Maybe it should have been the Item metadata element: Number of Pieces in stead of 'Volume'?

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 03/May/18 ]

Charlotte Whitt - The initial design of the volume, enum, chron etc came from the RA SIG. In some systems the Volume in the item record is included in or derived from enumeration, and in others it is a separate data element. If FOLIO does not store a separate value for Volume, then perhaps only enumeration is needed. We should have someone weigh in who is expert in enumeration and its multiple levels and how those might translate on the screen intelligibly to staff. That person is not me!

I also commented: In the MARC world there are 6 (I think) levels of enumeration. Only one of those might be volume, correct? If so, does FOLIO handle the current idea of multiple levels of enumeration, and how might that translate to a "volume" when displaying item info?

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 03/May/18 ]

Just to add a quick comment about contributors/authors - on these circ/request-related screens, I'm not sure we need more than one author/contributor. Is it super-important to see all 5 contributors for a resource on these particular screens? You can always go into the inventory record to get more details. But not my part of FOLIO, so I'm not heavily invested in it one way or the other.

Comment by Jakub Skoczen [ 17/May/18 ]

Tania Fersenheim and Charlotte Whitt will take it to the MM SIG.

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 21/May/18 ]

Matt Connolly - Should I break the "contributor" issue out into a new Issue, since there are multiple places author needs to be replaced by contributor?

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 23/May/18 ]

Tania Fersenheim That might be good, just to keep things organized.

Comment by Tania Fersenheim [ 24/May/18 ]

Matt Connolly - I've moved the Author/Contributor change to UIREQ-93 Closed
The item details changes are still blocked until Charlotte Whitt reports back from her conversation the MM SIG. I can rewrite this issue as needed when we get the info from MM

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 25/May/18 ]

Hi Tania Fersenheim - I have had a change to talk and show the MM-SIG subgroup reviewing the item record - the wireframe of the Request Detail Record

The immediately feedback on adding 'Volume' as a new element was not crystal clear, and the group discussed whether Enumeration would be sufficient, while it consist descriptive information for the numbering scheme of a serial, e.g. "v. 1 no. 3".

I have added the 'Volume' element to the MM-SIG masterspreadsheet, and will pick up the discussion again at our next meeting, next week.

If the element is to be implemented, then this is not happening over-night We're planning a release of all identified 'missing' elements for Inventory for the beta-release, and the addition of these new elements in both the UI and in the back-end needs to be coordinated work between Niels Erik Nielsen and Marc Johnson. Therefore I suggest that you and Matt Connolly continue the implementation of the relevant Request screens, and capture data from the Items record's 'Enumeration' element, and maybe leave a placeholder for potential information coming from a specific 'Volume' element.

I'll keep you up-dated!

Generated at Thu Feb 08 23:11:39 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.