1 Topic by MikeWeideli

  • MikeWeideli
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Littlefield Consultancy
  • Registered: 05-07-2006
  • Posts: 2,620

Topic: Changes In v6.20

We are working on a few things in the next release which might help with Rodis, but there might still be  the opportunity to change the specification slightly. Subject to not causing problems in testing the import wizard will allow import matching on taxon_version keys, name keys and location keys.  In the case of name keys and location keys they either need to be in the system first. I am not sure how you are working this.  Taxon version keys should be there as long as the dictionaries are in step.
 

To keep track of imported data we hope to provide a new field to hold the reference from the external system.   Basically there will an additional Import wizard type which will hold a 30 character reference. What goes in there is up to you.  It can just be the key from the external data, or you can use it to hold a site id and key. The data will go into a separate table which will be available in the report wizard and of course via XML reports. It will also be available on the observation hierarchy, but initially only via an addin (one of mine not a JNCC one).   

We will also be introducing a  new concept to Recorder which will in effect allow you to import data on a temporary basis.  This data will not be exportable, and the idea will be that you put it into a Survey, which you can delete and replace when a new updated dataset becomes available.  To make importing this data easier for this temporary data (and only for this),  it will be possible to import names in an unparsed format.  Options in the report wizard and a udf for xml reports will allow these unparsed names to be returned mixed with normally input names if required.  Added to this the new feature in 6.19 allows you to ignore unmatched taxa so any rubbish can be left out of the import. (incidentally Germany paid for this modification). 

You could use this on mapmate data, gateway data, spreadsheets, R6 data exported as spreadsheet. In fact anything where you are not going to get updates, but just a new dataset on an occasional basis. Not having to parse the names and being able to ignore taxa which don't match, should  speed up the import process.  It will be up to users to prevent this data going to the NBN.



Mike

Mike Weideli

MikeWeideli's Website

2 Reply by TeresaF

  • TeresaF
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: BTO
  • Registered: 12-05-2008
  • Posts: 171

Re: Changes In v6.20

Thanks very much Mike. We are having a north west lrc meeting on Wednesday and as most of us are using Rodis and Recorder and Record staff will be there I'll make sure we discuss, especially about locations and names.

-----------------
Teresa Frost | Wetland Bird Survey National Organiser | BTO
Other hat  | National Forum for Biological Recording Council
(Old hats  | NBN Board, ALERC Board, CBDC, KMBRC)

3 Reply by Luck

  • Luck
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Cheshire
  • Registered: 14-08-2007
  • Posts: 100

Re: Changes In v6.20

Thank you Mike, that's very good news. It will help the import and update process much more simpler and faster.

The only issue that I could think of is that when the species isn't on Recorder 6 when creating a new one, Recorder 6 then assign a taxon version key that won't match with the one from NBN web services.
Is it possible have something that allows a new species name  and the information will be fetched through NBN web services and populate user dictionary? 

Regards,
Luck

IT Officer
rECOrd (A Biodiversity Information System for Cheshire, Halton, Warrington and Wirral)
www.record-lrc.co.uk

Luck's Website

4 Reply by MikeWeideli

  • MikeWeideli
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Littlefield Consultancy
  • Registered: 05-07-2006
  • Posts: 2,620

Re: Changes In v6.20

The dictionary is fairly complicated and adding a new taxon version and has knock on effect on a number of other tables. For example if it is a replacement, then NameServer needs to be populated to point the old Taxon Version to the new one, and the Organism table will needs to be updated. I think this would make any automated approach very difficult. The best bet will be to keep the  R6 Dictionary in line with the one in use by the NBN. This is in fact the case at the moment, but I think there may be a need to specifically aim to keep the two in step, which we haven't worried about too much in the past. I have emailed Chrsi Raper at the NHM, to see if we can in future aim to do this.   Both the NHM and R6 dictionaries are based on exactly the same database from the NHM, but of course it is up to the user to make sure they keep their R6 dictionary up to date. Should users find anything which doesn't match, as long as they know the species name,  they will still be able to match it against a suitable entry in the R6 list, or create a temporary  entry to match to.

Mike Weideli

MikeWeideli's Website