Cross App SIG Jira Priorities 2025-08-27
Please see label #crossappsig for all Cross App Issues.
Jira ISSUE | Dashboard | Status Notes (from Tara) | Cross App Criteria | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The community has agreed that all searches should be case insensitive. Last note on UXPROD-4547 indicates that the next action is with the POs. I suspect that some of this was resolved with Ramsons: see https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MSEARCH-696. A sample sheet to help the SIG analyze which searches still need to be case insensitive is here:
| Consistency | ||
| 2 | The community has agreed that whitespace should be stripped. This is a fairly widespread issue--would it be worth analysing which fields exhibit this issue using an analysis sheet as above? Once that is complete, we can create a template ticket and placeholders. | Consistency | ||
| 3 | The community has agreed that wildcards should be standardized to * and ?. In our last meeting with the POs, there was concern that we need to further document why these symbols were chosen. Setting that aside, the SIG attempted to discuss and capture details about this issue, but it is extremely difficult to do so comprehensively--some apps allow the use of * but not ?, for example. It is also very challenging to address the nuance of this issue--should multiple wildcards in the same search be supported, for example? A more achievable first step might be to establish which fields allow wildcards at all, and which (if any) apps use % _. I believe from notes that this action still lives with the SIG (outside the existing linked ticket). | Consistency | ||
| 4 | The community has agreed on standards for dates: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AppInt/pages/4098870. Khalilah made several notes on this page indicating that this will move forward (if I understand correctly). I believe the SIG still needs to provide several examples on this one. Where can we watch for updates as this one moves ahead? Our ticket doesn’t seem to be the correct umbrella. | Consistency | ||
| 5 |
| This issue is partially covered by new functionality in Ramsons which preserves acquisitions relationships. Additional research and tickets may need to be submitted to represent other areas of FOLIO where this is an issue. | Cross App Functionality | |
| 6 |
| A survey was conducted on this issue to establish consensus. Additional tickets may be needed in order to implement this feature. | Consistency | |
| 7 |
| Community consensus was established through a poll. Individual tickets may need to be created to implement this feature in various apps. | Consistency | |
| 8 |
| Additional discussion to establish requirements is needed. We specifically note: hiding a field is different from removing a field, and some users may want to un-hide fields but this is a tenant-wide proposal. | Consistency/Black Hole | |
| 9 |
| This was discussed by Cross App SIG. This may be fully or partially covered by https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIIN-2727 which is also a draft. | Consistency/Black Hole | |
| 10 |
| This umbrella issue is still quite broad, but printing use cases have been established here: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AppInt/pages/4098735 . We may need SIGs to narrow down the desired (and most important) functionality and create sub-tickets in order for this to be actionable. | Consistency/Black Hole |