hey @CariTheKitty . You could try a browser high contrast plugin that switches the contrast (white becomes black and vice versa)
Just installed pawtucket2, not seeing any public records. now to find where that's set.
If they show up in the back-end, reindexing is not the issue
To track auction sales, consider recording them as occurrences
If you really want to use lots, and are ok with the 1 object:1 lot restriction we certainly could add hierarchy support for lots. It's not hard; it's just not an option that any one has asked for, and in some cases it might actually (and arguably) be confusing.
is there a way for it to default to public?
@collectiveaccess objects for the museum I work for are acquired via auction. What I am recording are purchases, not sales. I understand that an object can have only one associated lot, I'm not trying to assign more than one lot per object. I have realised the error in my thinking though. The lot I want to be the parent isn't actually an acquisition, it's probably better described as the concept of an acquisition. It's all the details of the purchase that except for the acquired items (they would be the child records). I don't think an occurrence would be the solution, what I need is more along the lines of a collection or a set. A concept of an acquisition to parent the group of distinct lots acquired from the one acquisition event.
(btw I'm working with @CariTheKitty on the archive of digital assets)
@gantt42 Just wondering, are you Australia?
Nope, I'm in East Tennessee, USA
@Jen-Sha You could create occurrence records for each auction, a lot for each purchase, and link auction to lot. This would solve the problem of duplicated auction data. As appealing as it may be to do this hierarchically, I don't think a purchase is a sub-type of an auction. It's something that references an auction.
@gantt42 Ok, so then I'm not the only one who works in the middle of the night.
:-(
There's no acquisition date, and the release date for many assets is unknown. This isn't a big deal, but I'm a perfectionist
Actually sorry, nvm. I just remembered that we're populating our database with a script(s?) so we can generate a pseudo-random ID easily in that
3 replies
@collectiveaccess Thanks for the help. I've done some poking and pondering and learnt a lot, I'm doing as you suggested - using an acquisition occurrence for shared invoice info. In the object lot editor inspector there is the 'Add new <object> to lot' option. Can I add the equivalent to the acquisition occurrence for adding a new object lot?
I'm struggling with the 'unit' display template. We have a list, code="list_games" and a metadataelement, code="game_variants" datatype="list" list="list_games". list_games stores all the possible values for the game_variants field. Each ca_object can have 0-10 games it's associated with. How do I use 'unit' to display the list of associated games on the object's pawtucket2 page?
I seem to have found a bug in pawtucket2. In this screenshot of pawtucket2, the related collections should be "CoC v1.1" and "CoC v1.2". As the screenshot shows, the first link does link to the page for for CoC v1.1, but the text for that link is actually "CoC v1.0 CoC v1.2", which is the name of every collection which isn't the correct collection.
I do hope I have been clear
To further explain, the database has 3 collections, each of which has a few objects. The collections are related to each other by an "is version of" relationship.
Apparent bug not present on objects, just collections. (I haven't tested anything other than those two)
Hello! It looks like the advanced search date field is pulling in records with broad date ranges (before 1999 will be included in a search for records from the 1970s). This isn't wrong, but I'm wondering if the date field could be a dropdown with decades like the normalizeddate filter?
I guess you could also just configure the range of decades to show by hand, which would be a whole lot simpler to code at least.
One other question, I'm wondering if our code is incorrect for displaying collection titles on object records because it's currently reading series > collection instead of the other way around -- ?