Issue 15505
Reorder filters based on expected importance
15505
Reporter: trobertson
Assignee: fmendez
Type: Improvement
Summary: Reorder filters based on expected importance
Priority: Critical
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Closed
Created: 2014-04-09 09:46:00.424
Updated: 2015-03-05 00:45:53.87
Resolved: 2015-03-05 00:45:53.841
Description: Currently Type Status is off the screen on a 15" macbook. I'd suggest reordering them based on the "best guess of priorities. Something like:
- sci name
- location
- date range
- basis of record
- type status
- multimedia (when present)
- dataset
- collector
...
- depth etc
[~ahahn] can probably propose a sensible list given the requests GBIFS have received for data over the years.
]]>
Attachment searchTerms.docx
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Comment: Good idea. What about a simple alphabetical order otherwise? Then at least you know where to expect a filter immediately without scanning the entire list.
Created: 2014-04-09 10:01:36.625
Updated: 2014-04-09 10:01:36.625
Author: trobertson@gbif.org
Comment: I suggest not alphabetical, as people don't really know what to look for (e.g. a collector number is shown as record number etc).
Created: 2014-04-09 10:07:26.108
Updated: 2014-04-09 10:07:26.108
Author: ahahn@gbif.org
Created: 2014-04-09 10:42:12.458
Updated: 2014-04-09 11:02:34.012
For a first stab, I would go for:
Scientific name
Country
Location
Basis of record
Type status
Multimedia
Collector
Record number
Collection date
Year
Month
Last modified in GBIF
Catalogue number
Dataset
Institution code
Collection code
Publishing country
Elevation
Depth
- Some of these are higher up then they would need so that they do not get separated from closely related ones (e.g. Year, Month next to Collection date). Type status and Multimedia may not be the most frequently used, but they are important. Similar for Basis of record, which we want to make people aware of if they are not yet.
In the old portal, we had things grouped by subject areas (Taxonomy, Geospatial, Datasets, Other details, see attachd). I had quite liked that, though it made Image URL and Basis of record drop to the bottom of the list, but I guess that is not an option in the new layout anyway.