Inventory app. Display of Instance data in detailed view. User feedback on current version (alpha)

The display of instance data, holdings data, and item data is work-in-progress, and something we are going to talk much more about in the MM-SIG, or in a focused working group (to be decided).

Here some initial questions re. the current presentation of instance data in detailed view in the alpha-release.

461622×1554 190 KB

1. Presentation of data in sections.
We present the instance data split into three sections following the UX guideline from Filip Jakobsen:

Question: What should we name the three sections.

• Section 1 named: Title data?
• Section 2 named: Descriptive data?
• Section 3 named: Content data?

2. How to list qualifiers
When in edit mode all list with qualifiers are listed alphabetic in the current version. E.g.

a) Contributor name-types,
b) Resource types
c) Format
d) Identifiers
e) Language
f) Classification

361014×514 32 KB

481012×500 33 KB

08484×558 31.5 KB

42988×708 42.8 KB

Question: Does this alphabetic order work as a consequent principle, or do you want the qualifiers to be listed in a more individual order, or ?

Having this sections is a good idea and I like the approach to differentiate between formal and content data. If we do so, “notes” & “series statement” could be pulled to section 2. If section 1 is labeld “title data” then elements like the “identifiers” could also be moved to section 2.

I had a look at the ISBD elements (pre print online here: https://www.ifap.ru/library/book264.pdf) but I’m not sure whether we could use these elements in a useful way.

1. Presentation of data in sections:
   I see this follows the “UX guidelines” from Filip, what is the guideline? Alice and I are wondering if these sections are truly necessary. If the purpose is to make the page collapsible into logical sections, then that makes sense…

2. How to list qualifiers:
   Ideally this would be locally configurable, especially if the list of qualifiers is long. If each institution could order these to fit their needs, that seems to be the best case scenario. How doable is this?

Alice and Lisa (Lehigh)