« 00007 · Edit Form · 00009 »

Summary: Research facility entry mask
Type: Feature

Priority (1<5) = 4
Status: Closed

Raised by: hal
Project: CORE Organic
Related to Issues?
Date opened: 2005–07–05
Assigned to hal
Hours used (estimates in brackets) = 5
Date closed: 2005–07–08

Description:
Research facility entry mask (= eprint type)

New eprint type to be added.

1. Include the usual fields (title, abstract, leader, etc.)
2. Add new field Location (TEXT, max 255 characters… or longer?)
3. Add new field Facility type
   1. This can be a SET with the 15 or so different options that have been suggested. Benefits: easy and clear for the user, easy to do searches by facility type. Problems: rather difficult to change the options if need be. Turns out not to be so difficult after all - only need to change options in metadataconfig file and, if new options are added, phrase files. So I will implement it like this. hal
      • Remember to add the open text field for other facility types
   2. Or it can be a simple text field, with the list of options given in a help text. Benefits: very flexible. Problems: will probably give less structured data, and searches will be by keyword and not a selection of options.
4. It will not be required to upload documents (see 00010)
5. Suggestion for entry mask from Helga
6. List of facility types from Frankfurt meeting
   experimental farm
   long-term crop experiments
   field study
   animal research facilities
   herd
   stable
   machinery
   laboratory
   analysers
   greenhouse
   biogas plant
   solar energy
   climate chamber
   phytotron
   others (open field to be filled)
   • I got the following, more elaborate list from Helga. I don’t think that having two levels of selections in the field is feasible. However, the facilities are entered as eprints and connected to the subject tree, so much of the information in the second level will be evident in the subject area selection (as well as in the description and, perhaps, the title.
   • Which list of options are we going to use (taking only the first level of Helga’s suggestion?

Implementation of new fields

On Issues.AddedFieldsJuly2005? the technical implementation is described in more detail, covering issues 4, 6, 8 and 9.