-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
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
Add a way to get the primary solr name for a field #293
Conversation
Errors are due to ruby 2.1.0 being out of date on travis. |
end | ||
end | ||
has_metadata 'descMetadata', type: MyMetadata | ||
has_attributes :title, datastream: 'descMetadata' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This question shouldn't affect whether or not this PR gets merged, but I wonder whether we ought to bring has_metadata and has_attributes in alignment with one another for consistency's sake. Tossing it out there for discussion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure how you see them as being out of alignment. Maybe you should submit a PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just putting this here for later reference...I'd love to see something that (optionally) brings has_metadata
and has_attributes
together as in
has_metadata `descMetadata`, type: MyMetadata, attributes: [:title, ...]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mbklein that looks good except for the case where "title" is single-valued and "author" is multiple.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The alignment criticism was a bit confused, agreed. Pondering this a bit further, I think my question boils down to this: in a more RDF-y, less datastream-y Fedora 4 world, is it still meaningful (or how is it still meaningful) to indicate "whereness" of metadata assertions?
In the following two statements:
has_metadata 'descMetadata', type: MyMetadata
has_attributes :title, datastream: 'descMetadata'
what will the role of the string descMetadata
be?
This is definitely beyond the scope of this PR, FWIW, and perhaps worthy of a discussion at Hydra Connect.
This will enable simpler Blacklight configurations and will eventually support looking up fields from solr instead of calling to fedora.
@mjgiarlo nits exterminated |
Merging (with caution, because I do what Github tells me to do). |
Add a way to get the primary solr name for a field
This will enable simpler Blacklight configurations and will eventually
support looking up fields from solr instead of calling to fedora.