Open michael-wynne-wsu opened 9 months ago
1) Okay that makes sense, I just wanted to confirm. I actually DO wonder how much inheriting from original record only would mess things up. In v3 a community had to be listed to enable creation of a relevant community record. I'm oversimplifying and probably missing something though...
2) I can see the no protocol filter at /manage/scald-atoms being useful once all referenced atoms are resolved. Any atoms left without protocols would in theory not be in use on the site, they could be assigned or just deleted easily.
The big issue I'm hitting is okay I have a list of atoms that need manually assigned protocols. How do I determine which protocols? Unless my file naming is great and I can identify DH items from there.... What about reporting the other way - here is a list of content that includes an atom with no protocol?
Happy to meet and discuss if it helps.
1) Do atoms get flagged as referenced by multiple items if it's used in a DH item with community records? I'm seeing a lot of them in my tests and that seems likely.
2) I suspect lots of sites are going to end up with a real mix of unreferenced and multi-referenced atoms (see below - out of 1530 atoms that needed a protocol assignment, 690 were able to duplicate from item). I don't know if we can practically do anything to make this step more manageable, but in a lot of cases I wouldn't even know where to start hunting down multi-referenced atoms. At least with unreferenced atoms if those could be separated out I bet many would be deleted or assigned a single review protocol...