Project

General

Profile

Feature #1809

Order of displaying information - artifacts connected with places

Added by Andreas Olschnögger 3 months ago. Updated 13 days ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Target version:
Start date:
2022-09-05
Estimated time:

Description

As reported:

Different types of objects (stationary and portable artifacts; archaeological sites; coins; inscriptions) need different order of displaying information – reorganize as follows:

  • Stationary objects and portable objects:
    • Within the upper green field:
      • Date (don’t show words “from” and “to” on frontend – only show the range with en dash; ex.: 800–900)
      • Place of production
      • Current location + Inventory number
      • Web link to museum object record [if current location = museum, and online object record exists]
      • Description (credit line, provenance, remaining desc)
    • Details:
      • Artifact
      • Category of authenticity; incl. “?” button [same as in the table view]
      • Religious affiliation
      • Dimensions [displayed only when known]
      • Material
      • Material composition [component listed only when exact composition known; if known, include: number + % (now number only)]
      • Has inscription: yes/no; if yes then inscription (included in the backend) must be visible (also link to inscription record in database if possible)
      • Bibliography [display only if assigned in backend]
      • Collection [display only if assigned in backend]
  • Coins [order to be provided by Shahi numismatist team
  • Archaeological sites [order to be provided by Shahi team]
  • Inscriptions [order to be provided by Shahi team]

Files

list view.PNG (48 KB) list view.PNG Andreas Olschnögger, 2022-11-09 14:23
chip-view.PNG (60.9 KB) chip-view.PNG Andreas Olschnögger, 2022-11-09 14:23

Related issues

Related to OpenAtlasDiscovery (origin) - Feature #1800: Detail ViewClosed2022-08-29Actions

History

#1

Updated by Andreas Olschnögger 3 months ago

@ Natasha Kimmet: please check if the provided information is current and provide us the missing information for the other types of objects. Once finished please assign the ticket to me.

#2

Updated by Gosia Lenko about 2 months ago

Please reorganize order of displaying information as follows:

Stationary objects and portable objects:

  • Within the upper green field:

Date (don’t show words “from” and “to” on frontend – only show the range with en dash; ex.: 800–900)
Place of production
Current location/owner + Inventory number
Web link to museum object record [if current location = museum, and online object record exists]
Previous location
Description (credit line, provenance, remaining desc)
If/When possible to connect artifacts with places (next OA update?) - if there is a connection of the artifact with a place then additionally “See also:” with a link to the connected place

  • Details:

Artifact
Category of authenticity; incl. “?” button [same as in the table view]
Collection [display only if assigned in backend]
Religious affiliation
Dimensions [displayed only when known]
Material
Material composition [component listed only when exact composition known; if known, include: number + % (now number only)]
Has inscription: yes/no; if yes then inscription (included in the backend) must be visible (also link to inscription record in database if possible)
Bibliography [display only if assigned in backend]

Archaeological sites
  • Within the upper green field:

Date (don’t show words “from” and “to” on frontend – only show the range with en dash; ex.: 800–900)
Description
“See also:” (until now Features/stratigraphic units of a place were not visible): here the features and/or stratigraphic units should be visible as a list of links;

eg.

See also:
Bamiyan 38m Buddha Niche
Bamiyan 38m Buddha Niche Ceiling east
Bamiyan Cave A
Bamiyan Cvae B

  • Details: (for all - display category name only if assigned in backend)

Collection
Kingdom
Patron
Religious affiliation
Type
Bibliography [display only if assigned in backend]

Inscriptions and coins [order to be provided soon by Shahi team]

#3

Updated by Alexander Watzinger about 2 months ago

  • Subject changed from order of displaying information to Order of displaying information
  • Assignee changed from Natasha Kimmet to Andreas Olschnögger

Thank you for the update and additional information, I re-assigning this issue to Andi.

#4

Updated by Andreas Olschnögger about 2 months ago

#5

Updated by Andreas Olschnögger about 2 months ago

  • Status changed from Assigned to In Progress
  • Assignee changed from Andreas Olschnögger to Natasha Kimmet

The view for stationary objects / portable objects and archaeological sites has been adapted.
https://shahi.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/single/667
https://shahi.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/single/5325

Please provide the missing information for the other types and reassign this issue to me.

#6

Updated by Gosia Lenko about 2 months ago

Missing information re: inscriptions and coins:

Inscriptions:

Green field:

Date (don’t show words “from” and “to” on frontend – only show the range with en dash; ex.: 800–900)
Place of production
Current location/owner + Inventory number
Description (credit line, provenance, remaining desc)
(Same as artifacts) If/When possible to connect with a place - if there is a connection with a place then additionally “See also:” with a link to the connected place

Details:

Inscription
Category of authenticity; incl. “?” button [same as in the table view]
Collection [display only if assigned in backend]
Kingdom
Language
Religious affiliation

Material
Modes of Manufacture
Bibliography [display only if assigned in backend]

Coins

Green field:

Name
Date (don’t show words “from” and “to” on frontend – only show the range with en dash; ex.: 800–900)
Current location/owner + Inventory number
Description
(Same as artifacts) If/When possible to connect with a place - if there is a connection with a place then additionally “See also:” with a link to the connected place

Details :

Type
Category of authenticity; incl. “?” button [same as in the table view]
Collection [display only if assigned in backend]

Dynasty
Issuer
Denomination
Dimension:

Diameter
Die-axis
Weight

Material
Modes of Manufacture

Bibliography [display only if assigned in backend]

Please let us know if anything is unclear.

#7

Updated by Gosia Lenko about 2 months ago

  • Assignee changed from Natasha Kimmet to Andreas Olschnögger
#8

Updated by Gosia Lenko 19 days ago

  • Subject changed from Order of displaying information to Order of displaying information - artifacts connected with places

Dear all!

I just noticed one additional issue re: displaying information which wasn’t visible before. Now, that we are able to connect artifacts to places, this should also be visible in the frontend.

It doesn’t need to be any fancy solution. Would it be possible to add the following:

- For place records: within the green field under the place name and date a link „Related artifacts” opening a list of connected artifacts? Should this not be possible, then maybe just a link at the end of the description, „Related artifacts:” followed by the list of connected artifacts (similar as for Places/Features).

- For artifact records: at the end of the description „See also:” followed by the place to which the artifact is connected.

Let us know if this is possible, or maybe you have better suggestions?

#9

Updated by Andreas Olschnögger 18 days ago

I have implemented the related artifact/places.

Please have a look if you like it. It is also possible to display the related artifacts as lists, but in some cases the list is very long.

The related artifacts are hidden by default but are expandable on click. This can also be adjusted to your liking.

I've attached two images to compare the 'list-view' and the 'chip-view' (current implementation).

example page:
https://shahi.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/single/1919

#10

Updated by Gosia Lenko 18 days ago

  • Assignee changed from Gosia Lenko to Andreas Olschnögger

Dear Andreas,
thank you for the super quick implementation. I think the expandable chip view indeed looks better.
I would just put it within the green field after the Name and Date. Otherwise, when there is a longer description incl. bibliography (eg. https://shahi.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/single/1697), one wouldn’t see the link or have to scroll a lot. I think this would make the connection more visible.

#11

Updated by Andreas Olschnögger 13 days ago

  • Assignee changed from Andreas Olschnögger to Gosia Lenko

I have know placed related artifacts after the name and date. Please have a look if it is fine for you.
(https://shahi.acdh-dev.oeaw.ac.at/single/1697)

Also available in: Atom PDF