Verify that data needed to drive dashboard is present in IR, or add it

jacobthill commented 5 years ago

One feature that will be added by the Access team is a public-facing data dashboard. We need to add all data that is not available in the current data model. We also need to confirm that all Items marked IR are accessible via a SOLR query.

Requirements:

[x] IR: total number of contributing institutions in stage (use agg_data_provider not agg_provider)
[x] IR: total number of contributing institutions in prod (use agg_data_provider not agg_provider)
[x] IR: total number of records from each institution (stage and prod)
[x] IR: total number of collections from each institution (stage and prod)
[ ] country of each contributing institution (stage, prod, and non-partner) (Does it make sense to add this to the IR by putting it in the metadata_mapping file and adding a to_field to each config?)
[x] IR: cho_edm_type of each record (stage and prod)
[x] IR: cho_has_type of each record (stage and prod)
[x] IR: language of each record (stage and prod)

@justinlittman, @jcoyne does this make sense? Let me know if anything needs clarification. @anarchivist, @waynegraham, and @tomcramer may have a few things to add/change still.

jcoyne commented 5 years ago

The IR items sounds like queries that could be written against Solr, right?

jcoyne commented 5 years ago

@jacobthill have you engaged a UX designer about this feature? It seems like having one of them create a comp could help us understand what it is intended to look like.

jacobthill commented 5 years ago

@jcoyne, yes the IR items could be written as queries against solr. I'm working on the view tickets for the access team now. I will share those with Gary and Astrid once they are complete.

jacobthill commented 5 years ago

Also, this could be implemented as two separate objects if it makes sense technically to do so. The IR items will drive the public facing dashboard and the others will drive the governing partner dashboard. I think the one exception to this is that the governing partner dashboard will need a way to see the difference between whats in stage vs. whats in prod while the public view will only need whats in prod.

jcoyne commented 5 years ago

@jacobthill I don't think we have a mechanism to tell who is a governing partner from those who are public users.

jacobthill commented 5 years ago

@jcoyne do you mean that information is not stored anywhere or that there is no means of differentiating access levels?

jcoyne commented 5 years ago

@jacobthill We don't have an user groups or levels in DLME that I'm aware of.

waynegraham commented 5 years ago

One thing I would say here is that I don't think it's 100% necessary to add an additional ACL layer for the governing partners to view the data. As long as there could be a way to export the data, we can generate charts elsewhere. This is a useful feature, but really only needed a few times a year...

jacobthill commented 5 years ago

@waynegraham that would simplify things for the infrastructure team. If we approach it that way, I can use a spreadsheet to track the institutions not partnering (which I already have) and generate visualizations elsewhere. I think that would make the rest of this a ticket for the access team, assuming they can get all the data they need by querying solr.

jcoyne commented 5 years ago

I confirmed that all the IR marked entries are in solr via https://github.com/sul-dlss/dlme/blob/master/app/resource_builders/dlme_json_resource_builder.rb. I don't know if there's more we need to do here.

aaron-collier commented 5 years ago

Thanks @jcoyne

sul-dlss / dlme

Verify that data needed to drive dashboard is present in IR, or add it #528