[Archivesspace_Users_Group] Should digital object file_uri field allow non URI data?

[Brian Hoffman]

Hi,

We have been trying to understand what to do about cases like the following:

http://sandbox.archivesspace.org/digital_objects/2/edit#tree::digital_object_2

[cid:image001.png at 01D73512.22D7F220]

As things are now, ArchivesSpace will allow a value like this, but various renderings and transformations will not work as expected. I am wondering if:


  1.  This is a legacy bug; the field should have originally validated values to ensure they were URIs
  2.  This is a presentation layer bug: non URIs should be allowed in the file_uri field, but HTML and PDF presentations need to accommodate that.
  3.  Everything is fine. Users should be able to put whatever they want in file_uri, but if they want it to present right they need to write a plugin.

This isn’t an academic question, as this is currently happening with records created automatically by Preservica software.

Brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/pipermail/archivesspace_users_group/attachments/20210419/d6b1f924/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 95638 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lyralists.lyrasis.org/pipermail/archivesspace_users_group/attachments/20210419/d6b1f924/attachment.png>