1

Re: Checked records

We have been getting a bit annoyed with the ease of unchecking taxon occurrences.

Correct me if I am wrong, but my interpretation of the check-box which appears by each occurrence, is to allow for someone to check that the occurrence has been entered correctly and to facilitate the exclusion of records which have not been checked from reports etc. This is a sensible and useful facility and the fact that it can be done by someone with relatively low-level access and without the need to put the occurrence in edit mode is also sensible.

Our problem however is that it is equally easy to uncheck the occurrence, thus excluding it from reports. We just found about 50 occurrences scattered through our dataset which have been unchecked inadvertently, probably by inexperienced users not understanding what the checkbox is for.

Once a record has been checked, why would one ever wish to uncheck it? There may be rare occasions when one needs to do so, but if this happens, surely it should require the occurrence to be in edit mode, or should at least say "are you sure you want to uncheck this?" Furthermore, when an occurrence is unchecked (or checked?), this should be recorded in the DATE_CHANGED and CHANGED_BY fields, so we can track down who it is who is inadvertently unchecking our data.

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

2

Re: Checked records

I've found one reason (not user error that is) why check boxes seem to be randomly unchecked: http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?id=1154

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

3

Re: Checked records

I tried this after I originally read your post Charlie and it doesn't happen on my machine and it can't be to do with the size of the dataset because we have over 700,000 records.

Strange...

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

4

Re: Checked records

Must be the way my system is set up... or perhaps I'm just super fast :cool:

One of the things on my do list is to display all non-checked records and check 'em - having had various "complaints" of missing records I tracked the problem down to suites of unchecked records (which had been entered years previously by someone else).

I wonder whether a dialog after inputting records saying "check these now!" or similar is worth considering?

Further to your point on why you would want to uncheck a record, is there a reason why unchecked records should exist in the database (aside from waiting to be checked)?

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

5

Re: Checked records

Well  we use it as I described above. We operate a syatem whereby data is entered via recording card by a member fo staff, and then a volunteer checks the data against the original paper copy to ensure it went in correctly. The result is that all records entered by this route end up checked and available for reporting.

As I said, once checked, they are checked. Unchecked is an ugly word and means very little, I don't think it is actually possible to uncheck something in the real world, so why does recorder allow us to do it, inadvertently and cause harm to our data and possibly our reputations?

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

6

Re: Checked records

It makes sense to uncheck a record when any of the content has changed. So, if you go into edit mode, change something and uncheck it, then I think it should be accepted without prompt. But I agree, just unticking the tickbox without explicitly editing the record is an unusual thing to do so it should be accompanied by a confirmation prompt.

Best Wishes

John van Breda
Biodiverse IT

7

Re: Checked records

Any chance of a fix then?

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

8

Re: Checked records

We fairly often untick records to take them 'offline'. If someone informs to us that a record looks wrong, or we need to stop some records appearing in our reports for whatever reason, unticking them offers a convenient way of disabling the records until further notice. It's quicker and easier than creating an 'invalid' or 'requires confirmation' determination.

Charles Roper
Digital Development Manager | Field Studies Council
http://www.field-studies-council.org | https://twitter.com/charlesroper | https://twitter.com/fsc_digital

9 (edited by RobLarge 04-12-2009 10:14:26)

Re: Checked records

Agreed Charles, but even so, do you not agree that the occurrence should be in edit mode to do this? Otherwise there is no audit trail, any user can untick any record without regard to their access level.

At the very least I would think it should ask for confirmation.

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre