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

[Jupiter] Create indexing functionality to ERA Thesis "Department" and "Supervisor" fields #1002

Closed
ERAHelp opened this issue Jan 28, 2019 · 8 comments
Assignees

Comments

@ERAHelp
Copy link

ERAHelp commented Jan 28, 2019

Being able to search for UA theses by the Department granting the degree and the Supervisor(s) who supervised the thesis has been repeatedly requested by our users over the years, and will add a lot of usability to our records (this a a popular search field in other Thesis databases such as Proquest Dissertation Abstracts).

Leah has stated that she would like this functionality added during the next Sprint if possible, with the understanding from prior discussion that it may be a fairly easily added feature.

Anna

@weiweishi
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed with @abombak These fields are currently indexed, and items can be located with an exact search. Issues are with the inconsistency of the data in these fields.
What can be done:

  • make the text a phrase search link on the record view, to find items with exact matched supervisor/department names

What needs to be discussed:

  • Can we add facets when searching within Thesis Collection, allowing people to find variations of names of the same departments etc?
  • Can metadata team create a report, of the various department names used.

Note this function is for advanced users only - can we allow search within certain fields with a search syntax to define the search scope?

@weiweishi weiweishi changed the title Create indexing functionality to ERA Thesis "Department" and "Supervisor" fields [Jupiter] Create indexing functionality to ERA Thesis "Department" and "Supervisor" fields Feb 8, 2019
@anayram
Copy link
Member

anayram commented Feb 8, 2019

@ERAHelp and @weiweishi - will create a report and share.

@pgwillia
Copy link
Member

pgwillia commented Feb 8, 2019

For example with department:

<% if @item.departments.present? %>
<li class="list-unstyled list-group-item-action">
<dl>
<dt><%= t('.departments') %></dt>
<dd>
<ul class="list-unstyled">
<% @item.departments.each do |department| %>
<li><%= department %></li>
<% end %>
</ul>
</dd>
</dl>
</li>
<% end %>

and this would generate the link: search_link_for(@item, :departments, facet: :search, value: department)

(This is rough, might be a little more complicated to get this right)

@weiweishi
Copy link
Contributor

Based on a conversation with @abombak, adding the search links for Department and Supervisor addresses the pressing need. It would still be good to consider adding Department facet specifically for the theses collection. But this would be a nice-to-have feature.

@weiweishi
Copy link
Contributor

Notice it says department_tesim on the UI, could we improve this display, instead of using the solr field name, use the display label "Department"?
Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 11 15 36 PM

@pgwillia
Copy link
Member

The way this is handled for other attributes is with 'facet' behaviour. We could make these 'facets' and reindex. (See #1060)

Is there any appetite for an advanced search like behaviour? Right now the search created for the link is just executed exactly as is with the solr field flowing all the way through. I was thinking of adding logic to interpret/validate http://localhost:3000/search?search[supervisors_sim][]=Frank+N.+Sense+(Administration) instead of http://localhost:3000/search?search=supervisors_tesim%3A%22Frank+N.+Sense+%28Administration%29%22

@weiweishi
Copy link
Contributor

@pgwillia
confirmed with @leahvanderjagt and @abombak that they'd like to add both of them as facets. Would you mind finishing up this work?

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants