Review and improve metadata tooltips, field labels and watermarks

[TaniaSchlatter]

This issue is to outline and track the effort to improve tooltips, field labels and watermarks related to metadata blocks. Clear and consistent tip text, labels and watermarks should help depositors curate their datasets and enter data accurately, leading to more and more consistent metadata.

Goals:

• Improve the collection of dataset metadata
• Define and document rules for adding or editing metadata tip text, field labels and watermarks

Scope/definition of done:
Review metadata tooltip text, field labels and watermarks for consistency and clarity: citation block, social sciences block, journals, geospatial, astrophysics

• define "working rules" to guide grammar and style/consistency improvements to tip text, form labels and watermark text
• apply the working rules to existing tooltips, field labels and watermarks. Drafting proposed edits for review
• document opportunities for additional improvements, such as form layout and behavior. These could be broken off as separate issues
• review proposed text changes with metadata/topic experts
• communicate with the community about changes (affects languages/translation)
• update tooltip text, field labels and watermarks in Dataverse
• evaluate changes
• complete & share the style guide

[jggautier]

We're recommending removing some tooltips. I tested if removing certain tooltips from the UI would be as easy as just removing the text in the description columns of a metadatablock's TSV file, like in the citation.tsv file:

To test this, I created a fork, edited the citation.tsv file to remove some text in the description column that's used for the tooltips, and spun up the fork in an AWS instance. The tooltips I had tried to remove were still there, using the text that's in the latest version of the citation.tsv file.

So I'm writing this to say that we might want to get a sense of how much development work would be needed to make sure that the tooltips we determine should be removed can be removed.

[djbrooke]

@jggautier feel free to pop in #dv-tech if you want to talk through anything from the technical side.

[djbrooke]

Thanks @TaniaSchlatter @scolapasta @jggautier for discussing earlier. The above checklist remains accurate.

• @scolapasta @jggautier and @djbrooke will meet to get a shared understanding of how tool tips are managed and updated for those installations that have localized and those that have not. In the meeting, we should also look at how to manage tool tips for system generated content (such as the dataset PID). We're planning on meeting Thursday at 1 PM.
• Groups that were mentioned for follow up were DDI Alliance, Scholar's Portal/Portage, and the curation team at the Harvard Dataverse Repository. @jggautier has a list as well. We will do targeted outreach to these groups and also general outreach to the community.

[jggautier]

I think most of the edits to the titles, tooltips and watermarks of fields in the citation metadatablock can be made by editing and reloading the citation.tsv file and citation.properties file. I've been making those changes in a branch at https://github.com/IQSS/dataverse/tree/8127-citation-field-improvements and I'm able to update that branch with those types of changes.

The changes that we agree should be made for this GitHub issue but can't be made by editing and reloading the citation.tsv file and citation.properties file are:

• Editing the title (what's shown in the UI) for the "Dataset Persistent ID" field
• Editing the description/tooltip for the "Dataset Persistent ID" field
• Editing the description/tooltip for the "Publication Date" field

Can those three things be changed easily?

The "working rules" to guide grammar and style/consistency are shaping up, too. I think they should be made publicly available, but when and how are open questions.

There are other changes we felt would be improvements but that we decided not to make for this first round of improvements because they would involve a level of design and development work that would hold up the majority of the other improvements. We'll be opening other GitHub issues about those.