Indicate that a digital item has parts on the digital collection results page

[saseestone]

This issue has evolved since the first writing....See below

Second half of #2581

We've got digital serials - so more digital collections with multi-part catalog records. Right now the number of items in a collection is the number of catalog records that make up the collection. It would be better if we showed the number of parts that make up the collection.

Example: https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/7154358

Chris mentioned counting the 856 tags associated with the collection, and using that number in the:

• "Explore this collection" on the collection record

• "Digital collection" count on the collection header (is that's what it's called?)

• "Digital collection" count in collection tile under Context

[saseestone]

I need to confirm with Gryphon search that they want to use "parts" in place of "digital items" as the descriptor for this new count.

[saseestone]

Gryphon Search is good with "parts"

[cebraj]

Thanks @saseestone . I guess to clarify, I think the "parts" was intended to replace the word "images" underneath the thumbnails in the digital collection preview (film-strip of thumbnails). The "digital items" label is still confusing, but I'm not sure "parts" would be a good replacement there because the objects in that quantity count aren't always "parts". Or maybe you meant to comment on the other ticket? https://github.com/sul-dlss/SearchWorks/issues/2624

[cebraj]

@saseestone Sorry somehow I missed your comment from 19 days ago! Based on Chris's suggestion above, I think it would be fine to keep "digital items" as the label representing the quantity but it's the quantity itself that needs to be updated (and yes, counting the 856's would make sense for records described by a catkey; but just a reminder that there may be non-catkey objects in the collection as well, so making sure those get counted too). And reiterating my previous comment, changing the label under the thumbnails from "images" to "parts" (other ticket #2624) still sounds good to me if that's what Gryphon Search agreed on. Thank you for carrying the issue forward.

[saseestone]

@cebraj do you have some good example records that don't have catkey objects, but that we'd want to update the quantity to include those objects?

I'll also alert G-search that you're concerned about using the term "parts" to replace the label of "digital items" in the digital collection. (Acknowledging that "parts" is perfect for #2624...but not for the descriptor in the collection info.)

[cebraj]

Hi @saseestone . I think if the issue in ticket #2624 is taken care of, then this issue here might become moot, because once the label below the thumbnails changes to "X parts" it becomes much more clear to the user that that item has multiple parts, but the item is still being counted as 1 item in the 'digital items' quantity. It just happens to be 1 item with multiple 'parts'.

I'm honestly not sure which approach would be better- to leave the digital items quantity as is, or to update it so that 1 part= 1 item so that every digital object gets included in the count. Did the Gryphon group have an opinion on that? I fear that I am so deeply embedded in Argo/SDR at the object-level that I want every digital object to be accounted for, and maybe my perspective is disconnected from the user viewpoint. At this point, I feel like the "parts" label in the thumbnail view is a sufficient solution.

Sorry for the long comment, but now I'm noticing another issue (potentially another github ticket?). When you click on "Explore this collection" you are taken to the search results view, and the items with 'parts' are listed there, but there's no indication that the item has multiple parts. I wonder if something similar to the thumbnail view could be implemented in the search results view so the user understands there are multiple 'parts' to see in that record.

To follow up on your request though, this collection includes items with 'parts' (item record is a catkey), single items (item record is a catkey), and single items (item records is a druid/mods record): https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/9102342

Single items are already included in the 'digital items' quantity, each counted as 1, and the items with 'parts' are counted as 1 (currently). Does the Gryphon group think it would be better to count every 'part' and include it in the 'digital items' quantity total?

[saseestone]

Discussed this with Jessica today. It would be good to get a UX perspective on this. When you look at a digital collection page and an item in the collection has parts, we don't indicate that to the user. Example record with four parts: https://searchworks.stanford.edu/catalog?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=9102342

However, Jessica and I agree that updating the number of "digital items" for the digital collection might not be the best solution. (Especially compared/contrasted to the header for the number of Catalog record results.)

How might we give an indication to the user that there are more items available?

This seems especially important when there is no thumbnail slideshow present on the digital collection record. See this example: https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/7154358

One goes from this view, with no slideshow to help you understand that there are parts:

to the collection result page, where the summary information on the first result indicates that it's one image. (And I'm going to try to track down why it's cataloged this way...) But really it has 62 parts:

to the digital item page, where you finally see all the parts:

It seems valuable to help the user understand that there are parts. The question is how.