Feature #5278

Allow users to see further facet results - improve facet usability beyond first 10 results.

Added by Dan Gillean almost 8 years ago. Updated about 5 years ago.

Status:NewStart date:06/25/2013
Priority:MediumDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:


Category:-Estimated time:24.00 hours
Target version:-
Sponsored:No Tested version:


Currently the facets provided in 2.0 interim 1 search/browse screens display only the top 10 results. This does not always make them useful to end users, especially if they would like to filter by institution or name but the desired entry does not appear in the available results - a user is pushed to the advanced search screen, which does not necessarily always add the necessary filtering functionality.

Several considerations that might improve the functionality:

1) Ideally, search filters could include scroll bars that allow users to see more results. If performance is an issue, this might function similar to the treeview behavior in 1.3 and forward, where more results are loaded incrementally. I would suggest that these appear in batches of 10 (at least) rather than 4 as found in the current treeview behavior in 1.x

2) In the User forum (see: ) Tim Hutchinson has suggested that an option for users to browse further results in a new screen might help improve the usability of the facets; he provides the following example: http://scaa.sk.ca/ourlegacy/solr?mode=results&query=Repository%3A%22University%20of%20Saskatchewan%20Archives%22 (look at the subjects facet, esp. the "show more" option included at the end of the available subjects).

3) Ideally, a simple search bar, such as that used for the treeview in #5195 (https://projects.artefactual.com/issues/5195) could be included for some of the larger facets, such as institution, creator, place, and subject - search would be restricted to title, but would allow the user to pull up filters not currently in view if the name of a desired institution is known, for example.

Related issues

Related to Access to Memory (AtoM) - Feature #5596: Repository records - additional access points and facets Verified 09/16/2013


#1 Updated by Jesús García Crespo almost 8 years ago

  • Target version changed from Release 2.0.0 to Release 2.1.0
  • Estimated time set to 16.00

#2 Updated by Dan Gillean over 7 years ago

Our current preferred model for considering facet improvement and development - see the Getty's approach here: http://search.getty.edu/gateway/search?q=&cat=highlight&f=%22Collection+Highlights%22&rows=10&srt=a&dir=s&pg=1

Note that the "show more" option keeps the user in the same page, offers a search bar for each facet as well as an addition 20 more terms at a time; multiple facets can easily be added and removed, and the user is updated about the choices they've made; additionaly, a running list of the facets applied is visible with the option to remove individually or clear all; etc.

#3 Updated by Tim Hutchinson over 7 years ago

Partly thinking about #5596, I was hoping to get some clarification about the current approach to whether facets are open or closed by default.

In #5618, Dan indicated: "default behaviour should be that any facet that is applied is open when the page loads. Ideally, any facet with more options than "All" should be open by default, so the users see the filter options immediately."
I believe the first part has been implemented, but not the second ... which is probably OK. It was pointed out to me that opening all facets by default would be problematic, since some would be off the screen. If it's one or the other, closing all by default seems preferable.

So, is it case by case in terms of which ones are important to have open? E.g. on the description browse page, language and institution is open by default; the rest are closed (unless they're populated). For the institution browse page, language and archive type are opened, and region is closed. In #5596 we are adding three facets, which should really be closed or else some won't be immediately visible.

Of course, configuration would be ideal (e.g. for a provincial network, region isn't really needed at all), but in the meantime it would be helpful to get an idea of the current assumptions/principles.

#4 Updated by Dan Gillean over 7 years ago

Hi Tim,

There's not really any principles at work, to be honest. The code hasn't really been tweaked since the 2.0 launch in any significant way - you are correct that when a facet is applied, it will appear open - and this is as it should be I think. I agree with you that, on further assessment, having all facets open may be problematic as they are pushed below the fold. Right now I think there might be a discrepancy between how the facets behave on a browse page versus on a search page as well - it's possible that the "all open" idea was implemented on search results - thought I'd have to test to confirm, and i just don't have a moment right now. I did want to respond to you on this ticket however before it slips away from me. I think that leaving the language facet open is a wise idea - so please consider that if you end up adding it to other pages. Otherwise, I would be fine if you left the current settings in place - we can always prepare a more thorough review of their behaviour throughout the application at a future date. I think that at this point, you also have a very clear sense of how things are supposed to work in AtoM, and what might need tweaking, so I also trust you to make some executive decisions about the facet behavior if needed. As ever though, I really appreciate how active you've been in seeking out input from Artefactual as you proceed with this. We are really looking forward to seeing the results!

#5 Updated by Tim Hutchinson over 7 years ago

Thanks, Dan. I definitely wanted to deal with most of these design issues up-front, rather than discovering issues after or in the middle of development :) Very much appreciate your support.

#6 Updated by Jesús García Crespo almost 7 years ago

  • Target version changed from Release 2.1.0 to Release 2.2.0

#7 Updated by Sarah Romkey over 6 years ago

  • Target version deleted (Release 2.2.0)

#8 Updated by Dan Gillean about 6 years ago

  • Project changed from Access to Memory (AtoM) to AtoM Wishlist
  • Category deleted (Search / Browse)

Moved to AtoM wishlist until sponsored for inclusion.

#9 Updated by Jesús García Crespo almost 6 years ago

  • Assignee deleted (Jesús García Crespo)

#10 Updated by Nick Wilkinson about 5 years ago

  • Estimated time changed from 16.00 to 24.00

Also available in: Atom PDF