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

Update hierarchy browse, fixes #76 #77

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

corinnemrogers
Copy link
Contributor

This update adds information about the Hierarchy browse option that can be set in Admin>Settings>Treeview, and seen on the archival descriptions browse page.

Copy link

@currmie currmie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking good

The Browse by hierarchy treeview will have the same functionality as the
standard treeview, except:

* All description titles from any level in the catalogue database will be shown
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Everything looks good, but this was the one part that I wasn't sure about. I read this sentence as implying that even child level descriptions will appear alphabetically in the hierarchy browser - is this true, or do child records retain their original order? Might be worth double-checking? If it's true, then no changes needed! If not, maybe just clarify this or state that the sort order is alphabetic for top-level descriptions?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

good catch! I have updated the text

@qubot qubot closed this Apr 8, 2019
@qubot qubot deleted the dev/issue-76-browse-treeview-hierarchy branch April 8, 2019 15:32
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.

4 participants