Original lat/longs

[DerekSikes]

Issue Documentation is http://handbook.arctosdb.org/how_to/How-to-Use-Issues-in-Arctos.html

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A clear and concise description of what the problem is. Ex. I'm always frustrated when [...]

when entering a new specimen record there should be a way to specify for original lat/long units: none

but still be able to enter lat/longs !

Quite often we enter data from an old label and we georeference the site at the moment of data entry. Arctos has no way to properly capture this information. Currently Arctos allows two options:

1. original lat/longs exist on the label & can be entered = verbatim data
2. original lat/longs don't exist on the label. No lat/longs should be entered

Describe the solution you'd like
A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.

We need option 3) original lat/longs don't exist on the label but we want to enter newly georeferenced lat/longs that are not verbatim, they were not done in 1988 or whenever the specimen was collected, they were done today by the data entry technician.

I understand that the agent's name in the 'event determiner' field is a way to figure out where the lat/longs came from (but how many Arctos data entry people are using this field properly I have no idea & doubt it's 100%) but this still results in corrupt data because the lat/longs end up being called 'verbatim' when they aren't. Verbatim should be reserved for only things on the specimen label, not things added by data entry techs at the time of databasing.

I had a very simple database for my PhD work and had a simple field called 'lat/longs interpreted?' yes/no

A yes meant that the lat/longs did not come from the label, a no meant that they did. Arctos should have some similarly simple way to distinguish these two.

Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

Priority
Please assign a priority-label.

[dustymc]

The "proper" way to handle that would be with two Events.

1. The data as provided by the collector entered with the initial specimen record and attributed to the collector.
2. The data as interpreted/enhanced/whatever by someone else, and attributed to that Agent.

That provides a full path back to the original, including the possibility that eg, the county asserted by the collector doesn't match the speclocality (which can't be accomplished under the viewpoint that the subsequent data can only be a georeference).

That's not particularly simple. #1357 might make it simple if we ever get to a point where it could be implemented.

[DerekSikes]

But it is impossible to enter 2 events at the time of data entry, correct? So we will continue to do things the wrong way. This reminds me of a something I heard from my groundskeeper boss: before building permanent pathways on campus, it's best to wait a year or two and see where the students walk. They will always choose the most efficient way to get from place to place. Then put the permanent paths where the students chose to walk.

…

-Derek

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:23 AM dustymc ***@***.***> wrote: The "proper" way to handle that would be with two Events. 1. The data as provided by the collector entered with the initial specimen record and attributed to the collector. 2. The data as interpreted/enhanced/whatever by someone else, and attributed to that Agent. That provides a full path back to the original, including the possibility that eg, the county asserted by the collector doesn't match the speclocality (which can't be accomplished under the viewpoint that the subsequent data can only be a georeference). That's not particularly simple. #1357 <#1357> might make it simple if we ever get to a point where it could be implemented. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2038 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIraMw0iC03T-cMTCSHO_x48S27rsc9pks5vfMyRgaJpZM4ck_ax> .

-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Derek S. Sikes, Curator of Insects Professor of Entomology University of Alaska Museum 1962 Yukon Drive Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960 dssikes@alaska.edu phone: 907-474-6278 FAX: 907-474-5469 University of Alaska Museum - search 400,276 digitized arthropod records http://arctos.database.museum/uam_ento_all <http://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/ento/> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Interested in Alaskan Entomology? Join the Alaska Entomological Society and / or sign up for the email listserv "Alaska Entomological Network" at http://www.akentsoc.org/contact_us <http://www.akentsoc.org/contact.php>

[dustymc]

impossible

Not quite - there's a bulkloader and you can write to it with...

I like your analogy. We're still trying to figure out what sort of transport mechanism we're going to use - the placement of the footpaths won't much help if we decide (via #1705) to take the train or maybe swim between classes....

#1357 is finding efficient paths, once we figure out the big stuff.