What fields should be displayed on an item's view? about warclight HOT 9 CLOSED

Seems like we'd want the collection names and owning institutions available as well.

from warclight.

What about "all of them"? You might group them into primary and secondary to provide easier overview, but if they are not visible somewhere, they might as well not be in the index.

from warclight.

Great on JSON.

If it's trivial to expand to see all fields on an item-level description, I'd say we should implement it. If not, I think having API support would be sufficient.. especially given the granularity of some of the fields, they're probably mostly only useful in aggregate (as opposed to looking at them item by item?).

from warclight.

content_language would be useful too.

from warclight.

Should we change content_type to content_type_norm? i.e. application/xhtml+xml would become just html.

from warclight.

And I would vote to remove server.

from warclight.

I really think we should persue @tokee's recommendation here.

If we go with two groups (fieldsets) on this, it could work out well. Have the first group be what we have now, and expanded by default. Then second group be all the other fields, or all of the fields, and it is collapsed by default. The real cool thing here is the API win; you'd get all the data for a record. Example with current 0.2.0 setup: http://warclight.archivesunleashed.org/catalog/DkZzgWN3oIuklvt322%2F4Uw==%2F20170131103924.json

So, if we're cool with that, we should do it!

from warclight.

Oh, I stand corrected. I believe the json view already returns everything it has from the looks of it. I'm seeing fields there that I don't have explicitly declared in the item's view.

from warclight.

Given JSON gives all information, we're happy with the default item-level view. We'll make sure to document the JSON view option.

from warclight.