Thanks for the clarification, Bill. Thanks for the suggestion, Paul. I have a further suggestion--how about "Library and System Settings?"
In the interim, will Release 1.4 remain with "Library Settings" for documentation purposes? Betty On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:01:26 -0600 Paul Waak <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 22, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Bill Erickson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:38 PM, John Fink <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> From: "Betty Ing" <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:12:46 -0500 > >> Subject: [conifer-discuss] > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am documenting the Local System Admin. functionality using Dwarf > >> build-rel_1_4 and have noticed the following: > >> > >> Selecting Library Configuration and then the Library Settings > >> Editor, I > >> see a screen with the title Organization Unit Settings. Are we > >> standardizing on Library Settings or Organization Unit? > >> > > > > Library Settings seems more staff friendly. However, Organization > > Unit is > > more.. correct, since settings can be applied at all levels of the > > organizational hierarchy, many of which would not be called a > > "library". > > For what it's worth, from the developer perspective, we generally > use > > Organization Unit. From the staff perspective, is it better to be > > > friendly > > or correct? > > > > Could the name of the hierarchy level be pulled and used in the > title? So at ou=System, the title reads "System Settings"? > > Paul Waak > [email protected] > > >
