verbatim event-stuff

[dustymc]

ref: #2038, #1971

"verbatim coordinates" are the coordinates as received by Arctos before I transform them into DD.ddd for mapping and etc. We are overusing the existing structure; everything that does not involve triggers should be removed.

There is some apparent reluctance to use Verbatim Locality for things like coordinates as provided by the collector.

What are we trying to do here, what do we need to do it, etc.?

[DerekSikes]

"verbatim coordinates" The data entry form has fields for lat/long that are titled 'original' not verbatim. I still think there's a problem with it being too difficult to properly enter a record that has no original coordinates for which one wants to enter coordinates at the time of data entry. The simplest way to allow this to happen is to let people choose 'none' for original/verbatim coordinates but still allow them to enter coordinates - Arctos could just parse this into two events, one with no coordinates and one with the coordinates entered. however: if the 'original' coordinates are being called 'verbatim' coordinates later... *they should be called 'verbatim' coordinates on the data entry form.* Consistency matters... and although these terms could be called synonyms, they aren't. When I see verbatim I think of the specimen label, when I see original, I think 'the first coordinates to be given for this site that I know of' or something along those lines (and often the first coordinates are the ones I georeference myself). Also, can the decimal lat/long fields on the data entry form be made a bit larger? often times the length of the data I try to enter is wider than the visible field.

…

-Derek

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:00 PM dustymc ***@***.***> wrote: ref: #2038 <#2038>, #1971 <#1971> "verbatim coordinates" are the coordinates as received by Arctos before I transform them into DD.ddd for mapping and etc. We are overusing the existing structure; everything that does not involve triggers should be removed. There is some apparent reluctance to use Verbatim Locality for things like coordinates as provided by the collector. What are we trying to do here, what do we need to do it, etc.? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2041>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIraM1cHrSE0KzGT-Srlsfuox06Vz1SQks5vf5R2gaJpZM4cqwAE> .

-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 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]

titled

Yes, we're using "verbatim" for two things - 'stuff the collector provided' and 'stuff that was entered into Arctos.' I'll relabel if "verbatim coordinates" survive this Issue.

The data entry form is just an attempt to make entry a little more streamlined. I can do WHATEVER there. "Correct" might be requiring you to enter everything (what #2038 is requesting??) but that would be minimally (if the original are in DD.dd format) twice the amount of stuff to deal with.

lat/long fields on the data entry form be made a bit larger?

Sure, but can you send me a screenshot of what you're seeing and an example of the data you're entering? Mine looks like....

which I think is centimeter-precision. I just need to know where I'm starting from and heading....

[Jegelewicz]

Consistency matters... and although these terms could be called synonyms, they aren't. When I see verbatim I think of the specimen label, when I see original, I think 'the first coordinates to be given for this site that I know of' or something along those lines (and often the first coordinates are the ones I georeference myself).

I agree. I think we need verbatim coordinates (collecting event) and original coordinates (locality). I know this probably seems like overkill, but it is important to retain the verbatim information as recorded by the collector (collecting event), if coordinates are entered in verbatim and none in original, then the verbatim could carry over. We should also keep any verbatim datum, georeference source, georeference method in the collecting event.

[Jegelewicz]

This would also make it pretty easy to see if a locality had been georeferenced as the collecting event coordinates (or lack thereof) would differ from the locality coordinates...

[dustymc]

georeferenced

Note that georeferencing (changing the shape) does not necessarily produce new coordinates.

We should also keep any verbatim datum, georeference source, georeference method in the collecting event.

That's what verbatim_locality exists for???

There's a request (somewhere...) to back-load locality history, which would allow you to un-georeference a locality and attribute that to the collector (which has the benefit of not scattering those data across multiple tables depending on local procedures and such). I can SQL that in until such a tool exists.

[campmlc]

Perhaps the problem is primarily semantic. Stop calling things " verbatim" that aren't.

…

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 2:00 PM dustymc ***@***.***> wrote: ref: #2038 <#2038>, #1971 <#1971> "verbatim coordinates" are the coordinates as received by Arctos before I transform them into DD.ddd for mapping and etc. We are overusing the existing structure; everything that does not involve triggers should be removed. There is some apparent reluctance to use Verbatim Locality for things like coordinates as provided by the collector. What are we trying to do here, what do we need to do it, etc.? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2041>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AOH0hDDgHvRVi-GAx4Ui8dOOE20Vz9Rpks5vf5R2gaJpZM4cqwAE> .

[Jegelewicz]

verbatim_locality

Is just a string value, correct? it hides the verbatim coordinates in a long string of stuff.

[dustymc]

verbatim coordinates and verbatim locality are both strings

[Jegelewicz]

verbatim coordinates and verbatim locality are both strings

But verbatim coordinates does not include the metadata of datum, georef source, georef method - those just pass through to locality. If the locality is altered, that information is either very well hidden or lost, rendering the verbatim coordinates less useful. While many of the verbatim coords have limited metadata, I think we should be keeping it together with the verbatim coordinates as a complete record of the "verbatim".

[dustymc]

But verbatim coordinates does not include the metadata of datum, georef source, georef method - those just pass through to locality.

Correct - I don't alter those, my math can't possibly be changing what you enter because nothing gets changed; those are verbatim from my perspective. (Not necessarily yours - I don't know or care where you got them, it's just what you fed the screen.) And it's "verbatim coordinates" not "verbatim random bits of the shape and stuff...."

very well hidden

That we can fix - eg there's now a link on specimendetail

verbatim

I sorta get the arguments for more structure, but I think "keeping it together" is more important given the utility of the data and the intent of 'verbatim.' If you just put "locality description as provided" (http://handbook.arctosdb.org/documentation/collecting-event.html#verbatim-locality) in verbatim locality then that's where you always find it. If you don't, then it's there unless it's not - "coordinates" that fit in the data entry screen end up one place, those that don't (TRS, milgrid, OLC, etc., etc., etc.) end up somewhere else.

[dustymc]

Clarified documentation