Open atz opened 8 years ago
@blalbrit @LynnMcRae
What kind of differences do you see? What I saw in a brief sampling seems pretty vanilla (though all the creative commons
One of the differences I'm seeing is this ability which only lives in Hydrus:
https://github.com/sul-dlss/hydrus/blob/master/app/models/hydrus/licenseable.rb
This is a work in progress, and is not in scope for my current work cycle. I briefly pursued this while working on #228, when I ran into a test failure relating to rights metadata. This is down to eight failures so I will leave this branch hanging around.
Needs:
master
dor-services
gem:20a21,28
> t.license do
> t.human {
> t.type_ path: { attribute: type }
> }
> t.machine {
> t.type_ path: { attribute: type }
> }
> end
22a31,42
> t.access do
> t.human
> t.machine do
> t.world
> t.group
> t.embargo_release_date(path: embargoReleaseDate)
> end
> end
>
> t.discover_access ref: [:access], attributes: { type: discover }
> t.read_access ref: [:access], attributes: { type: read }
>
32a53,58
> # Template to allow insertion and removal of licenses
> define_template :license do |xml, gcode, code, txt|
> xml.human(type: gcode) { xml.text(txt) }
> xml.machine(type: gcode) { xml.text(code) }
> end
>
47a74,77
> xml.license do
> xml.human(type: )
> xml.machine(type: )
> end
Why does Hydrus have (so much of) its own
Hydrus::RightsMetadataDS
? It does not inherit fromDor::RightsMetadataDS
which means it breaks indexing when other attributesto_solr
expectdefaultObjectRights
to have minimal features.Error is:
Note also NokogiriDatastream deprecation. My instinct is that Hydrus should inherit and minimally extend Dor's RightsMetadataDS, but examination suggests they differ in subtle and annoying ways. What is the design intent?