Problem with access points

[Nathanael]

Hi

Has anyone else encountered this problem? Sometimes I start typing a term in the place or subject access points field in an archival description, then find it does not appear in the dropdown list because we have not yet got it in the taxonomy. So I delete the text I had started to type, save the archival description and then go to add the term to the taxonomy. However I find that the incomplete text I had typed already now appears as a term in the taxonomy, even though I had deleted it. See attached image for clarification.

I know you can create new terms just by typing into the access points, but I usually prefer to do this through the 'add term' page.

A separate issue is that we have many place terms like 'Meanehay Farm Mill, Budock' where it would be useful if this term appeared in the dropdown when typing 'Budock' in the 'place access points' field - however it only appears if you start typing 'Meanehay'. This seems to be different from the 'related descriptions' field where you can type any word in the title of an archival description and find it in the dropdown.

Thanks

Nathanael

Mills Archive

[Dan Gillean]

Hi Nathanael, 

Regarding the first issue: behind the scenes AtoM uses iframes to handle related entities in some of the edit forms. In this case, it looks like draft access point term iframes are not being cleared before the form is submitted. I've filed an issue here to track this, so we can hopefully address it in a future release: 

• https://projects.artefactual.com/issues/13634
  

Regarding the second issue: 

One of our developers has let me know that this difference is because currently, the terms autocomplete in the description edit template is using MySQL, whereas the Related descriptions autocomplete is using Elasticsearch. ES, being made to support search functionality, is unsurprisingly more versatile for indexing and autocomplete results. Work could potentially be done to move this to ES, but there are tradeoffs - indexing more term fields and making them available via the information object pages requires more memory overall, increasing system requirements. 

Cheers, 

Dan Gillean, MAS, MLIS

AtoM Program Manager
Artefactual Systems, Inc.
604-527-2056

@accesstomemory

he / him

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AtoM Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ica-atom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ica-atom-users/1f1d2b40-2b62-4ea3-bc2e-b17d3d5adcb4n%40googlegroups.com.

[Nathanael]

Thanks Dan

Nathanael