Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify role of abstract_archival_object schema #1424

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 11, 2018

Conversation

lorawoodford
Copy link
Contributor

Minor tweak to clarify that abstract_archival_object is the parent schema for the four major archival record types: resources, archival objects, digital objects, and digital object components.

Description

Also includes small tweak to remove duplicative information from digital object component schema.

Related JIRA Ticket or GitHub Issue

Motivation and Context

It was not obvious by naming convention that this abstract schema applied to the four major record types.

How Has This Been Tested?

Confirmed no changes were noticeable within the application.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@lmcglohon lmcglohon added this to the 2.5.2 milestone Dec 11, 2018
@lmcglohon lmcglohon merged commit a673b90 into archivesspace:master Dec 11, 2018
@lorawoodford lorawoodford deleted the schema_cleanup branch May 2, 2019 18:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants