Reorganize Concepts section (and others) #2112
Conversation
| Islandora uses the [Portland Common Data Model (PCDM)](https://github.com/duraspace/pcdm/wiki) | ||
| to arrange elements | ||
| of the repository. Nodes correspond to pcdm:Objects, and Media to pcdm:Files. | ||
| The "Member of" field on nodes allows us to create pcdm:memberOf relationships |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Checking - should this stay "Member of" or be referred to as field_member_of here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm pretty happy leaving this in "user language" in this place.
| @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ | |||
| # RDF in an Islandora Repository | |||
|
|
|||
| Islandora was build on the idea that a repository can be represented | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we may need to replace "build" with "built" here?
|
I need to build the docs based on this PR to see the new proposed TOC order side by side with the current one, to help we weigh in on the new order better. So far I like what I see. |
|
Potential overlap with some content on the Resource Nodes and Media pages https://islandora.github.io/documentation/user-documentation/resource-nodes/ @inikolaidis |
| - 'Paged Content': 'user-documentation/paged-content.md' | ||
| # conceptual and procedural, repository managers/ curators | ||
| # move out procedural description for ordering pages | ||
| - 'Audio': 'models/audio.md' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These 2 pages on models (audio, video) are to be made still, correct? I don't think we have a corresponding page in our documentation for these yet
|
Thanks @rosiel for your awesome work. |
Purpose / why
I didn't think that the "Concepts" section made much sense with what it had in it. I rewrote the section with some new pages outlining what I think are the key islandora concepts:
Then, I reorganized some of the files, putting more walkthroughs into the "Tutorials" section (which I renamed "walkthroughs"), and divvied the "Sysadmin documentation" into developer and user and contributing documentation.
I also created a section to discuss things like "collections" and "paged content" and hopefully "audio" "video" "image" and specifically "newspaper" - all the content types that have associated behaviours that people are going to want to see.
Verification
Does having the "concepts" like this make sense?
Interested Parties
Checklist
Pull-request Reviewer
Pull-request reviewer should ensure the following:
Person Merging
The person merging should ensure the following: