Reorder Identifiers, Links, and Catalog Record boxes on record detail page

[mkoo]

Maybe considered part of #5509 (We've brought this up in the past but making sure we have an issue lodged.)

I have a quick sketch below but will write out the basic problem and solution. The problem is having the Identifiers listed in the bottom half of the GUID page, when we need to see this adjacent to the Agents. Instead, it makes more sense to have that listed next to the Links (external links like GBIF). Currently it looks like both Identifiers and Links would fit in a two-column row. The catalog record box should return to the bottom of the page as has data relevant to Arctos but not for the original data of the record.

Link to sketch

of course the real problem is that this is what we need for biological records and archival/cultural/ arts have other needs so in a future iteration we may need to have two versions of this record page but right now it doesnt suit either.

tweak doable?

[dustymc]

Maybe considered part of https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5509

No, I think this is good. There are some position requests in there (@AJLinn and @ccicero that I can remember), but that thread is now too big to digest, the basics seem happy, I think this deserves its own space.

It is relatively easy to change the layout by moving things around.

It is relatively easy to change things from full-span to floaty 2-column things.

I haven't been able to let things decide how many columns they need from how much data they're carrying, but I think it's possible.

Identifiers and parts have multiple possible views, and some need more room in certain directions than others. That's potentially how other things could work as well. CSS/design to deal with that level of variability isn't magic, but maybe it's not too far from it.

Identifiers needs the full width for many records, and https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/4604 (should we ever figure it out) is going to greatly add to that.

Links don't exist for many (possibly most) records in Arctos.

Verbatim Agents can radically alter the shape of Agents.

The position of the "two column" things depends on the existence of other two-column things. ("Same row" is a data-dependent situation, mostly.)

biological records and archival/cultural/ arts

I suspect it's deeper than that. Teaching collections will be pretty barren, tissue-centric collections should have lots of identifiers, cultural collections - and those involved in CT scanning, and.... - like Media, etc, etc.

It's definitely useful to find an example with Media.

TAGs are more rare (only 3K?!) but get a box.

https://arctosdb.org/learn/gold-standard-records/ is a good place to start, and I tend to build for the most complex (because they do weird things to UI) but might not exactly be representative of the stuff a CM might encounter a thousand times per day either.

I'm not sure there IS or can be a 'representative record' so making changes from any single record (or even collection) seems to backfire on the next, which suggests this would be a good topic for open discussion. I was going to suggest that a UI Task Force meeting should be widely publicized and dedicated to this, but I don't see that on my calendar - has that group disbanded?

tweak doable?

Technically: sure. Socially: Not so sure, might be great or might un-do a bunch of the other positioning that's been requested, both directly for this form and in all the very many conversations that lead up to it. More input would be very useful.

two versions

This page is incredibly complex (less than it used to be though!) and maintaining two(++) of them as a bunch of code would not be any fun at all (which doesn't mean I'm not willing to try if it comes to that - but maybe after a few weeks, when we're more sure I'm not going to have to fix some giant bug 17 times).

Opposite that, it's CSS grid, and CSS grid supports more than the dynamic 'use what you need' approach that's there now. A collection can (in theory) explicitly put stuff wherever they want it with their CSS. I'm not sure I could figure that out for all of Arctos but a good CSS-centric designer probably could, and almost certainly can for a collection (no one of which likely touches all the nooks and crannies represented on that page). This moves the page into a modern framework, that means much more than mobile.

[campmlc]

I agree with this. We need to move the important data above the fold, visible on most laptops. And collector and collector number should be adjacent.

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 10:22 PM Michelle Koo @.***> wrote:

• [EXTERNAL]*

Maybe considered part of #5509 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5509 (We've brought this up in the past but making sure we have an issue lodged.)

I have a quick sketch below but will write out the basic problem and solution. The problem is having the Identifiers listed in the bottom half of the GUID page, when we need to see this adjacent to the Agents. Instead, it makes more sense to have that listed next to the Links (external links like GBIF). Currently it looks like both Identifiers and Links would fit in a two-column row. The catalog record box should return to the bottom of the page as has data relevant to Arctos but not for the original data of the record.

Link to sketch https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1lBUAVb_7V0VBK-yTT0v-vwIIGKuMhwCgR6b5mgeVY68/edit?usp=sharing

[image: proposed record detail page change] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2523089/213622891-3696b78f-9245-4789-8f74-3ad87cfa7a1d.jpg

of course the real problem is that this is what we need for biological records and archival/cultural/ arts have other needs so in a future iteration we may need to have two versions of this record page but right now it doesnt suit either.

tweak doable?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5510, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBAP55NNTHJCBQPIW6TWTIOINANCNFSM6AAAAAAUBEFC3M . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

[AJLinn]

There are some position requests in there (@AJLinn and @ccicero that I can remember),

My request is to keep media at top left [EDIT: sorry I mixed up my L/R when i wrote the original comment!] with Agents next door.

The catalog record box should return to the bottom of the page as has data relevant to Arctos but not for the original data of the record.

100% agree. At least for EH records, this should not be prioritized over the information about the cataloged item.

Identifiers and parts have multiple possible views, and some need more room in certain directions than others.

Agree with @dustymc here as our part attribute contents are loving having room to breathe!

It's definitely useful to find an example with Media.

For comparison, here's a record with media and citations as well as multiple events and long content in the part attributes.

Cultural collections, in my experience, rarely have links / relationships / other identifiers. We do have a lot in attributes and sometimes remarks. We're hoping to add more citations, but that's minimal for most of our records for now.

We need to move the important data above the fold, visible on most laptops.

I'll continue to not hold my breath for that for cultural collections!

[campmlc]

Could citations be moved to the right of or under identifications, with media below? Would it work for cultural collections to have agents moved down adjacent to identifiers? Agents and identifiers need to be in proximity. Or, put identifiers above Record Attributes, so there is a chance of seeing them near the top? If cultural collections don't have many, that won't take up much real estate?

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:52 AM Angela Linn @.***> wrote:

• [EXTERNAL]*

There are some position requests in there @.*** https://github.com/AJLinn and @ccicero https://github.com/ccicero that I can remember),

My request is to keep media at top right with Agents next door.

The catalog record box should return to the bottom of the page as has data relevant to Arctos but not for the original data of the record.

100% agree. At least for EH records, this should not be prioritized over the information about the cataloged item.

Identifiers and parts have multiple possible views, and some need more room in certain directions than others.

Agree with @dustymc https://github.com/dustymc here as our part attribute contents are loving having room to breathe!

It's definitely useful to find an example with Media.

For comparison, here's a record with media and citations https://arctos.database.museum/SpecimenDetailResponsive.cfm?collection_object_id=23809656 as well as multiple events and long content in the part attributes.

[image: Screenshot 2023-01-20 at 8 42 58 AM] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17605945/213770871-8350b074-2c7e-4cea-b7d4-a74314c3d719.png

[image: Screenshot 2023-01-20 at 8 47 08 AM] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17605945/213770976-98f94367-2ac1-4987-b97f-93127f382d38.png

Cultural collections, in my experience, rarely have links / relationships / other identifiers. We do have a lot in attributes and sometimes remarks. We're hoping to add more citations, but that's minimal for most of our records for now.

We need to move the important data above the fold, visible on most laptops.

I'll continue to not hold my breath for that for cultural collections!

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5510#issuecomment-1398741150, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBHGI5LY5NZUYSMB5TTWTLGD5ANCNFSM6AAAAAAUBEFC3M . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>

[campmlc]

Or, looking back at @AJLinn s comment, Media could be top right opposite Identifications, followed by Citations, Agents, Identifiers, and Record Attributes, in whatever order fits best on the page? Does that still allow record attributes to be visible for the cultural collections?

[dustymc]

right

Right and left don't really make sense in the context of this form. Given A B C, C is on the right (of the first row) if B exists and on the left (of the second row) if it doesn't, assuming two columns.

On a smaller screen things will just stack in a single column.

Adding a third (or more) column for even larger screens would be a relatively trivial media query (but it's about 20 times harder to organize than 2 columns so I didn't spend too much time on the idea).

citations be moved to the right of ... identifications,

Identifications is currently full-span, so there is no "right of." Under is available.

agents moved down adjacent to identifiers

Identifiers are also full span, "before" and "after" are the plausible relationships - and "after" will result in a tiny thing and then a whole bunch of nothing, unless you're putting more maybe-there partial-span stuff down too.

opposite Identifications

Before (which would result in most of the prime real estate being mostly empty for most records, unless other stuff which might fill it is included) and after are the only available relationships to identifications.

in whatever order fits best on the page

If you're asking for the elements to somehow sort themselves, I think that would be magic.

If you mean "whatever we might agree to" then sure, but be aware that that's 2 full-span and 2 partial-span elements, so ordering can result in half-screen gaps, and so can missing elements.

I think what I need is a list of the elements in order without left/right/above/below references, but you need to be aware of the size (only two possibilities at the moment) of the various things while assembling the list.

Is the UI Task Force done? Maybe it should be resurrected for this.

[campmlc]

If we have the time, I absolutely agree with another UI meeting. @AJLinn can you make a meeting next Tuesday at 4 pm MDT?

[mkoo]

edited: The 3rd UI meeting is already on the calendar for this Tuesday! Let us know if you cannot make it and please suggest a better time for you @AJLinn 1/24@ 2 pm AK/ 3 pm PT/ 4 MT

[AJLinn]

I just need to arrange for my kid to get picked up from school, unless you all can do an hour earlier?

[mkoo]

I can-- Teresa wont be able to make it. Let's shift for this week since it's priority work. We will encapsulate meeting in this thread and still be able to have discussion esp. if anything radical comes up but it seems we're in the finesse stage now

Calendar will be updted accordingly!

[AJLinn]

thanks for accommodating me this time! See you Tuesday!

[Jegelewicz]

And collector and collector number should be adjacent.

https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/4604

[dustymc]

Agree with @Jegelewicz - if there's really some link then lets form a task force and figure out how to actually do that as part of @4604, if there's not then the symbolic closeness (or whatever it is...) shouldn't be necessary.

[dustymc]

• Smited via JS: can IDs/relationships not exist when no data?
• DONE:: Provide list of elements and column requirements
• DONE:: links - all the way to the bottom

[dustymc]

HEADER

DONE:: make sure inst/collection are getting link css DONE::see angelo - image has weird padding, figure out why and make it die record identifier - move it to the right? add copy and open buttons-er-sumthin

Moving record identifier to the annotate column isn't going to work; that results in squished-up locality info right next to acres of whitespace; moved it to curatorial and gave it a copy button.

DONE::navbar - mouseover gray to directory fill blue DONE::chill out with the border? thinner? DONE::banner - use savBtn color as bg DONE::banner - expand character limit to just not quite ridiculous

[campmlc]

I'm ok with this:

• can IDs/relationships not exist when no data?

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 3:31 PM dustymc @.***> wrote:

• [EXTERNAL]*

  • can IDs/relationships not exist when no data?
  • Provide list of elements and column requirements
  • links - all the way to the bottom

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5510#issuecomment-1402778066, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBE47RK3G4CLCDBQCR3WUBJ5NANCNFSM6AAAAAAUBEFC3M . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>

[dustymc]

Here are elements and layout:

Identifications: full width Agents (including verbatim) - half-row Citations - half-row Links (going to bottom) TAGs - half-row Media - half-row Catalog Record/Curatorial - half-row Record Attributes - full row Place- full, includes locality and event attributes when present Identifiers and Relationships - full, user-customizable Parts - full, user-customizable Reports - full

[campmlc]

How do we link identifiers, relationships, and agents for collector number, preparation number?

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 4:40 PM dustymc @.***> wrote:

• [EXTERNAL]*

Here are elements and layout:

Identifications: full width Agents (including verbatim) - half-row Citations - half-row Links (going to bottom) TAGs - half-row Media - half-row Catalog Record/Curatorial - half-row Record Attributes - full row Place- full, includes locality and event attributes when present Identifiers and Relationships - full, user-customizable Parts - full, user-customizable Reports - full

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5510#issuecomment-1402833187, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBDOBK7JCQSG6QFGAE3WUBR47ANCNFSM6AAAAAAUBEFC3M . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>

[dustymc]

Consider giving accession media a dedicated "cell" - on some pages it would make little difference, on others it would be much more compact. I don't think an extra cell would ever result in less compact, but it's hard to anticipate all possible states.

https://arctos-test.tacc.utexas.edu/SpecimenDetailResponsive.cfm?collection_object_id=23802950

[mkoo]

How do we link identifiers, relationships, and agents for collector number, preparation number?

@campmlc please file a new issue so we dont lose track of your question if unresolved!

[mkoo]

Here are elements and layout:

Identifications: full width Agents (including verbatim) - half-row Citations - half-row Links (going to bottom) TAGs - half-row Media - half-row Catalog Record/Curatorial - half-row Record Attributes - full row Place- full, includes locality and event attributes when present Identifiers and Relationships - full, user-customizable Parts - full, user-customizable Reports - full

Thanks for this list-- useful-- please let us know when you reorder priority of display of GUID prior to launch tomorrow night! Thanks!

proposed ordered list:

1. Identifications: full width
2. Agents (including verbatim) - half-row
3. Citations - half-row
4. Identifiers and Relationships - full, user-customizable
5. TAGs - half-row
6. Media - half-row
7. Catalog Record/Curatorial - half-row (should this be full row since it is not paired with another half-row? Esp. if cultural collections use this for a lot of remark details that are public
8. Record Attributes - full row
9. Place- full, includes locality and event attributes when present
10. Parts - full, user-customizable
11. Reports - full
12. Links (going to bottom)

[dustymc]

I did this in the hopes that it will help understand how this works. Mixing up the single-column things in with the 2-column things just inevitably results in a lot of empty whitespace. Pick a number, search for it in catalog number, open a bunch of tabs, almost all of them will look something like...

and I've got to scroll past acres of empty nothingness to find any information.

No bueno.

Let me know when I can move all the single-column things back to the top of the page.

[dustymc]

For the sake of fairness: https://arctos-test.tacc.utexas.edu/guid/MVZ:Egg:6 looks pretty good with this layout.

[mkoo]

remind me again why Identifiers is NOT a half-row ? (would save a half-acre of fallow web page...)

Yea and that Egg record is typical of a lot bio records so exactly what we were talking about Agents and Identifiers nice and convenient to each other. thanks for being fair!

[ewommack]

remind me again why Identifiers is NOT a half-row ?

Is that because it fills out huge with some of the collections that have a lot of info in there (cultural)?

[jldunnum]

Agreed that layout looks good!

---

Jonathan L. Dunnum Ph.D. (he, him, his) Senior Collection Manager Division of Mammals, Museum of Southwestern Biology University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131 (505) 277-9262 Fax (505) 277-1351

Chair, Systematic Collections Committee, American Society of Mammalogists Latin American Fellowship Committee, ASM

MSB Mammals website: http://www.msb.unm.edu/mammals/index.html Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/MSBDivisionofMammals

Shipping Address: Museum of Southwestern Biology Division of Mammals University of New Mexico CERIA Bldg 83, Room 204 Albuquerque, NM 87131

---

From: dustymc @.> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2023 7:14 PM To: ArctosDB/arctos @.> Cc: Subscribed @.***> Subject: Re: [ArctosDB/arctos] Reorder Identifiers, Links, and Catalog Record boxes on record detail page (Issue #5510)

[EXTERNAL]

For the sake of fairness: https://arctos-test.tacc.utexas.edu/guid/MVZ:Egg:6 looks pretty good with this layout.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5510#issuecomment-1404483371, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AED2PA52VBAUZXWV2SB5BB3WUHMZLANCNFSM6AAAAAAUBEFC3M. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

[dustymc]

Even simple mostly-legacy records with good IDs don't fit in a half-page. Parasites are worse, the coming metadata will be much worse.

Egg record is typical

Citations and Media and not much else are not typical!

Typical is agents (and no other single-column things), then nothing where identifiers breaks the page up, the one more 2-column thing.

[campmlc]

Absolutely agree with @dustymc , for parasites and pathogens and genetic and genomic data, identifiers need to be a full row, as we need the repeatedly requested additional metadata to include remarks and ID issued by (e.g., for MVZ, you'd have the institutional agent name). Maybe that seems obvious for MVZ, but for instituions such as ZRC it is not. If we had the ID Issued by metadata, then for collector number and preparator number, the Issued by agent would be the collector and preparator's agent name, and all the data would be together in one place. We could also specify that an ID was issued by NCBI, and capture all the various types of GenBank identifiers, instead of only a single one right now which doesn't accommodate their data complexity. And we could simplify the identifiers table. Every external institution would not need an identifier type, as the institution would be the issued by agent. And from the institution's agent summary page, we could find all the records that agent was responsible for an "Issued by" determination.

[mkoo]

Actually I'm ok with Identifiers for full row too if everyone can live with the potential for white space-- it actually doesnt bother me that much as I check out records all last night (not just MVZ's but ALL our collection types- fun!). There's still info on every row and I just hit my jump to bottom shortcuts if I dont want to scroll.

I suggest we keep the current order b/c it's still important to have Identifiers prioritized near the top.