As a content editor, I would like a new box in the footnote/source section of the document page specifically for "minor emendations" so that the notes field does not get messy.

[richmanrachel]

testing notes (QA)

On the QA site admin:

• On the Footnotes section, add or edit a new footnote. There should be a new field called "Minor emendations by" and it should have help text explaining its function

• On the Documents section, edit a document and look at the footnotes section. The new emendations field should be there too, and (after hard refresh) the emendations and notes fields should be of reasonable size for the expected data.

• Spot check some of the following footnotes' emendations fields. These have been auto-populated from existing footnotes notes fields.

  Footnotes with emendations from notes field

  • footnote id 13
  • footnote id 42
  • footnote id 149
  • footnote id 154
  • footnote id 313
  • footnote id 363
  • footnote id 401
  • footnote id 466
  • footnote id 468
  • footnote id 511
  • footnote id 647
  • footnote id 725
  • footnote id 816
  • footnote id 855
  • footnote id 880
  • footnote id 888
  • footnote id 896
  • footnote id 914
  • footnote id 917
  • footnote id 919
  • footnote id 920
  • footnote id 925
  • footnote id 931
  • footnote id 1000
  • footnote id 1123
  • footnote id 1149
  • footnote id 1270
  • footnote id 1306
  • footnote id 1323
  • footnote id 1430
  • footnote id 1433
  • footnote id 1506
  • footnote id 1553
  • footnote id 1563
  • footnote id 1616
  • footnote id 1659
  • footnote id 1662
  • footnote id 1666
  • footnote id 1685
  • footnote id 1745
  • footnote id 1753
  • footnote id 1772
  • footnote id 1786
  • footnote id 1856
  • footnote id 2063
  • footnote id 2091
  • footnote id 2099
  • footnote id 2124
  • footnote id 2129
  • footnote id 2143
  • footnote id 2146
  • footnote id 2148
  • footnote id 2157
  • footnote id 2168
  • footnote id 2181
  • footnote id 2182
  • footnote id 2198
  • footnote id 2218
  • footnote id 2229
  • footnote id 2267
  • footnote id 2287
  • footnote id 2288
  • footnote id 2313
  • footnote id 2314
  • footnote id 2320
  • footnote id 2321
  • footnote id 2328
  • footnote id 2338
  • footnote id 2345
  • footnote id 2350
  • footnote id 2358
  • footnote id 2364
  • footnote id 2373
  • footnote id 2380
  • footnote id 2393
  • footnote id 2432
  • footnote id 2452
  • footnote id 2462
  • footnote id 2465
  • footnote id 2540
  • footnote id 2543
  • footnote id 2554
  • footnote id 2568
  • footnote id 2682
  • footnote id 2722
  • footnote id 2740
  • footnote id 2787
  • footnote id 2803
  • footnote id 2815
  • footnote id 2840
  • footnote id 2935
  • footnote id 2950
  • footnote id 2966
  • footnote id 2969
  • footnote id 2988
  • footnote id 3134
  • footnote id 3170
  • footnote id 3182
  • footnote id 3189
  • footnote id 3192
  • footnote id 3211
  • footnote id 3223
  • footnote id 3227
  • footnote id 3255
  • footnote id 3287
  • footnote id 3288
  • footnote id 3302
  • footnote id 3304
  • footnote id 3308
  • footnote id 3318
  • footnote id 3327
  • footnote id 3328
  • footnote id 3346
  • footnote id 3354
  • footnote id 3355
  • footnote id 3364
  • footnote id 3397
  • footnote id 3399
  • footnote id 3407
  • footnote id 3409
  • footnote id 3412
  • footnote id 3413
  • footnote id 3416
  • footnote id 3437
  • footnote id 3564
  • footnote id 3573
  • footnote id 3604
  • footnote id 3664
  • footnote id 3667
  • footnote id 3680
  • footnote id 3820
  • footnote id 3826
  • footnote id 3831
  • footnote id 3845
  • footnote id 3855
  • footnote id 4097
  • footnote id 4113
  • footnote id 4179
  • footnote id 4187
  • footnote id 4189
  • footnote id 4194
  • footnote id 4203
  • footnote id 4210
  • footnote id 4228
  • footnote id 4234
  • footnote id 4288
  • footnote id 4295
  • footnote id 4306
  • footnote id 4310
  • footnote id 4313
  • footnote id 4352
  • footnote id 4370
  • footnote id 4389
  • footnote id 4396
  • footnote id 4400
  • footnote id 4411
  • footnote id 4425
  • footnote id 4431
  • footnote id 4435
  • footnote id 4444
  • footnote id 4446
  • footnote id 4456
  • footnote id 4470
  • footnote id 4472
  • footnote id 4489
  • footnote id 4503
  • footnote id 4511
  • footnote id 4523
  • footnote id 4526
  • footnote id 4534
  • footnote id 4579
  • footnote id 4620
  • footnote id 4630
  • footnote id 4647
  • footnote id 4648
  • footnote id 4661
  • footnote id 4672
  • footnote id 4702
  • footnote id 4745
  • footnote id 4763
  • footnote id 4770
  • footnote id 4792
  • footnote id 4794
  • footnote id 4802
  • footnote id 4835
  • footnote id 4891
  • footnote id 4897
  • footnote id 4899
  • footnote id 4991
  • footnote id 5024
  • footnote id 5027
  • footnote id 5053
  • footnote id 5156
  • footnote id 5230
  • footnote id 5273
  • footnote id 5298
  • footnote id 5366
  • footnote id 5386
  • footnote id 5396
  • footnote id 5397
  • footnote id 5416
  • footnote id 5425
  • footnote id 5444
  • footnote id 5653
  • footnote id 5808
  • footnote id 5810
  • footnote id 5864
  • footnote id 5935
  • footnote id 5942
  • footnote id 5959
  • footnote id 6083
  • footnote id 6128
  • footnote id 6186
  • footnote id 6187
  • footnote id 6228
  • footnote id 6297
  • footnote id 6306
  • footnote id 6486
  • footnote id 6593
  • footnote id 15881
  • footnote id 16539
  • footnote id 16626
  • footnote id 16717
  • footnote id 16808
  • footnote id 16824
  • footnote id 16883
  • footnote id 16988
  • footnote id 16992
  • footnote id 17241
  • footnote id 17380
  • footnote id 17750
  • footnote id 18006
  • footnote id 18110
  • footnote id 18388
  • footnote id 18473
  • footnote id 18517
  • footnote id 18551
  • footnote id 18638
  • footnote id 18689
  • footnote id 18769
  • footnote id 18815
  • footnote id 19058
  • footnote id 19062
  • footnote id 19341
  • footnote id 19431
  • footnote id 19435
  • footnote id 19465
  • footnote id 19573
  • footnote id 19578
  • footnote id 19579
  • footnote id 19586
  • footnote id 19716
  • footnote id 19789
  • footnote id 19947
  • footnote id 20063
  • footnote id 20344
  • footnote id 20625
  • footnote id 20814
  • footnote id 21811
  • footnote id 22154
  • footnote id 22424
  • footnote id 22614

• Check all of the following emendations fields. These have been auto-populated as well, but involve slightly more complex data (multiple people/dates).

  • footnote id 2886
  • footnote id 3156
  • footnote id 19745
  • footnote id 22417

---

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
In order to keep our data cleaner and more consistent, it would be good to have a dedicated box in the source section for "minor emendations by" [insert box to include creator name] and an emendations date box for month and year.
[See https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JHscvhF6wEbX1Ep_SJaNm7VgCvMvo06-4F4RYyb6e2E/edit?gid=0#gid=0 for previous clean up needed]

Describe the solution you'd like
The following boxes in this order in Footnotes:

• Source
• Document relation
• Location
• Minor emendations by
• Emendation date (Month/Year)
• Notes [this box can be made smaller to indicate it should not be used frequently]
• URL (Link to the source (optional))

Describe alternatives you've considered
@blms - if you think this is a bad idea, we can reconsider, but it seems like it might be the easiest way to handle this for the future.

Additional context

• We will need to ensure that the code that put "minor emendations by" in the notes field re-routes to the new fields.

[blms]

Started working on this, I've found a few things I wanted to flag/ask questions about based on the existing data:

1. With this approach, we'd lose granularity in the citations about "emendations" being distinct from "revisions", "additions", "suggestions", etc. Would it be okay for that info to be stored separately in the notes field?
   • The citation would still read "with minor emendations by", and the notes field would be accessible only to content admins. So the public would miss out on the distinction, unless we devise some way to include the notes in the citations.
   • If we do store it there, it might actually make sense just to leave the notes field alone in all existing records, even if it's duplicative of the emendations field, to avoid losing any of this data.
2. How should we handle cases like this one, with multiple people with different kinds of emendations?

   with minor emendations by Yaara Perlman and Joshua Picard, and with an edition of the Arabic verso by Marina Rustow

3. Entering multiple names could also result in idiosyncratic citations in general, since people may not know what order to list them and whether to separate with a comma, etc. This could at least be alleviated by help text giving a standard way to list multiple people, and manually fixing nonstandard ones when encountered, but wanted to raise it as a potential issue.
4. Same with multiple dates, e.g.

   With minor emendations by Marina Rustow, 3/16/23, and Alan Elbaum, 4/8/23

[blms]

We will need to ensure that the code that put "minor emendations by" in the notes field re-routes to the new fields.

FWIW, in case it clears any confusion about why there's so much variance between the notes field contents, there isn't any code at play here currently! It's all manually entered so far.

[blms]

Questions answered in meeting 2/3:

• Only one "With emendations by" field, no separate dates field. Help text will instruct how to enter dates, which is Person Name, Year.
• It's ok that further granularity gets lost to the public, it can go in the notes.
• Multiple names and multiple dates will be dealt with as they appear.