Here are several not altogether related feature requests Monash University has suggested:
1. Adding Collections to Collections to show a richer organisation and hierarchy
2. Changes to the project list when moving items from My data into a project when the list of projects is so long they don't all fit on the one page. Options include a longer list being displayed, a search box or a reversible alphabetical listing of projects.
3. Making the way to edit a live item more obvious rather than putting the cursor on the item and then clicking on the little pencil icon.
4. Making request for storage increase more obvious rather than having to move the cursor across the current storage quota.
5. Migrating Pure profiles into figshare. Considerations include: adding to the existing profile information vs deleting it and replacing it vs only migrating from Pure into an empty figshare field.
figshare Product Specialist Australia and New Zealand
on behalf of Monash University
Its been three months since this was posted, is there going to be a response from figshare on any of the feature requests listed here?
I'd like to echo Andrew's comments, as we have received further feedback from La Trobe University researchers in recent weeks, particularly affirming points #1 and #3
Hi Andrew and Steven,
These features are not on the current figshare roadmap. Features are prioritised based on customer requests as well as our internal work and schedules. At the moment these requests have not been prioritised and for that reason aren't part of the current roadmap. We never ignore requests or shelve them, instead we look at all feature requests together to determine which ones to move into production.
Figshare Product Specialist
We have had several researchers at La Trobe University ask about feature #1 here too. My experience is that those who ask about this richer Collection structure tend to see this as a deal-breaker feature that will determine whether they can or cannot use Figshare for their purposes.