Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Search API integration - Property label and description #4190

Closed
stefan-korn opened this issue Jun 3, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4191
Closed

Search API integration - Property label and description #4190

stefan-korn opened this issue Jun 3, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4191
Assignees

Comments

@stefan-korn
Copy link
Contributor

stefan-korn commented Jun 3, 2024

Describe the bug

The metastore_search module provides Search API integration. This means you can use every schema property as a Search API field in an index of Datasource DKAN Dataset.

But the Search API fields are only described by the property key and do not have a label nor a description.

Screenshot adding a field (see for example that 'accessLevel" is only described by property key, while normally there would also be a label for a field like with "Rendered HTML output" above.)
grafik
A place where this is more of an issue is if you add an aggregated field and want to choose the "contained fields". Any field from the DKAN Dataset Datasource is just shown as "DKAN Dataset >>" with no additional information. This is also because of missing label and property for the Search API field.
Screenshot:
grafik

Steps To Reproduce

Add a field to the DKAN search API index

Expected behavior

Label (and description) for Search API fields of DKAN Dataset Datasource should show up. Take the title property from schema for the label and the description property from schema for the description.

@stefan-korn
Copy link
Contributor Author

Screenshots with #4191
grafik
grafik

@dafeder
Copy link
Member

dafeder commented Jun 6, 2024

Wow amazing timing @stefan-korn I am just working on a custom index and need an aggregated field, I think. Taking a look at this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants