Deploy 'External Vocabulary' scripts, developed by QDR, to Author and Funding fields on Harvard Dataverse

[cmbz]

Overview

• ORCID and ROR 'External Vocabulary' scripts developed by QDR have been tested on the Author Name and Author Affiliation fields on demo.dataverse.org, as well as the Funding Information Agency field.

• Following review by members of the UX WG and conversation with Dataverse team members we have decided to deploy the scripts on Harvard Dataverse in order to support our work to support the GREI Metadata Recommendations.

  • See: GREI Metadata and Search Subcommittee Recommendations_V01_2023-06-29

• The purpose of this issue is to deploy the 'External Vocabulary' scripts on Harvard Dataverse, with the watermarks changed to read "Select or enter...":

  

  

See the rationale for the watermark change.

Related

• Review of changes to the Author and Funding Information fields on Demo Dataverse
• Running meeting agendas and notes for Dataverse UX Working Group
• Running Notes: Metadata Coordination
• GREI 2: Implement the GREI Metadata Recommendations V1 and V2 for Harvard Dataverse dataverse-pm#127
• Feature Request: Add ROR to the citation metadata block author identifier field dataverse#11075

[qqmyers]

@jggautier - Can you pick a custom watermark from the options you gave? Also - we focused on the author fields - should we deploy on other fields as well?

[jggautier]

Hey @qqmyers.

Can you pick a custom watermark from the options you gave?

For everyone else, here's what I wrote from today's meeting (see the Google Doc meeting notes for more):

1. Using the text "Enter a person or organization" would keep the text short, since we've got limited space
2. Using the text "Select or enter a person or organization", although some of this text is always cut off, regardless of the width of the field
3. Using the text "Select or enter...". This might be more in line with the watermarks/placeholders used for other fields
4. Removing the watermark/placeholder

Of those options I gave, I'd pick the third for now, "Select or enter...". It's the shortest of those 3 options; by not mentioning people, I think it addresses the potential issue of users thinking that they can add only people; and it follows the "Select..." watermarks/placeholder text of other fields that let depositors choose from lists, like the Identifier Type fields.

Also - we focused on the author fields - should we deploy on other fields as well?

I agree during today's meeting we talked mostly about the Author fields. In other meetings, we talked about the Author and Funding Information fields, those are the two fields whose changes I reviewed, and Sherry reviewed that review.

We haven't talked about and I haven't reviewed the changes I see on the Depositor field on Demo Dataverse. I'm not sure why I missed that that field was changed, too. I don't think we should deploy on the Depositor field or on other fields for now. I wrote that after evaluation, we can use what we learn to adjust the redesign of the Author and Funding Information fields and redesign other fields used to describe people and organizations, which would include the Depositor field.

@cmbz, I'd like to remove the mention of the Depositor field from your description. Would that be okay?

[jggautier]

Thanks for removing mention of the Depositor field @cmbz!

@qqmyers I just edited what I wrote about the watermarks/placeholder text so that hopefully the reasoning is clearer. There were some typos and weirdly-worded sentences 😅

@cmbz adjusted her comment to point to what I wrote about how the watermarks/placeholder text should be changed. So I'm assuming "Select or enter..." will be used when Harvard Dataverse's Author and Funding Information fields are changed.

@cmbz, can we also prioritize changing the watermarks/placeholder text of the Author and Funding Information fields that we see on Demo Dataverse, too? That'll make it possible to use Demo Dataverse for the usability testing I'm planning now. If so, I can create a GitHub issue for changing that watermarks/placeholder text.

[pdurbin]

Do we want feedback from the community on the proposed changes? I have a link to this issue queued up in the draft of the next community news, but I can remove it if it's premature.

[cmbz]

@jggautier please see: #327

[jggautier]

Do we want feedback from the community on the proposed changes? I have a link to this issue queued up in the draft of the next community news, but I can remove it if it's premature.

Definitely, requesting feedback in this way is great in general. And since the changes will also be on Demo Dataverse, maybe the community news post can point to Demo Dataverse to see how the two fields are being changed?

Also, I know this is sort of semantics, but writing that the "citation metadata block is being updated" might make some folks think that the citation.tsv file is being changed. I know that we know that that's not the case here, so I think it's okay that that's what this GitHub issue's title reads.

I'll be reaching out to different folks in the community for usability testing, so maybe the community news post can ask folks to contact me if they're interested in usability testing, too?

[jggautier]

Thanks for creating that GitHub issue @cmbz!