1 Reply by TonyP (edited by TonyP 03-11-2010 14:13:12)

  • TonyP
  • TonyP
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Somerset
  • Registered: 15-05-2006
  • Posts: 306

Re: Importing Locations - Same Names Different Place

I have many sites with the same name, the world is full of them. People who use such programs as MapMate make up names all the time. So there are many Park Woods in my world.

I have just tried to import some data and there are two Park Woods, 10km apart and the recorders have used two different 1km references to locate them.

The Import wizard has decided, presumably based on name that this can only be one site/location. I have sites for both locations as this is the real world and it happens.

The problem is that for some reason the programmer decided that Name and Grid Ref are not what makes a location unique but just a name.

Should I just have one site/location called say Somerset? This is the real implication even if some what extreme! :mad:

Oh OK I'll just go and change all my site names and ignore what everyone else calls them after all names aren't really important are they?

Of course it would be good if the import wizard actually found any of the locations I have in the database. I have many items being imported with identical names and grid refs but the wizard takes no notice. More reason for only one site perhaps?

Data Manger
Somerset Environmental Records Centre

TonyP's Website

2 Reply by ser

  • ser
  • ser
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Staffordshire Ecological Recor
  • Registered: 24-09-2008
  • Posts: 603

Re: Importing Locations - Same Names Different Place

Tony,

I've had the same problem and found it useful, to gradually remove sites with the same name - i.e. editing the site names so they are unique, e.g Park Wood, Cheadle and Park Wood, Stoke - this makes finding the correct site easier.

It does mean I have to edit any imports BEFORE importing to change the names of these sites to avoid them being identical - this usually means running the import once - finding the duplicates - going to the source and editing the entries then re-doing the import

Craig Slawson
Staffordshire Ecological Record

ser's Website

3 Reply by TonyP

  • TonyP
  • TonyP
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Somerset
  • Registered: 15-05-2006
  • Posts: 306

Re: Importing Locations - Same Names Different Place

I agree that is one approach but should the tail really be wagging the dog? I think Recorder should be 'fit for purpose' under the fundamental rules of QA.

Data Manger
Somerset Environmental Records Centre

TonyP's Website

4 Reply by ser

  • ser
  • ser
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Staffordshire Ecological Recor
  • Registered: 24-09-2008
  • Posts: 603

Re: Importing Locations - Same Names Different Place

Two different sites with exactly the same name are certain to cause problems, it is good practice to make them easily distinguishable, Recorder just forces the issue

Craig Slawson
Staffordshire Ecological Record

ser's Website

5 Reply by TonyP

  • TonyP
  • TonyP
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Somerset
  • Registered: 15-05-2006
  • Posts: 306

Re: Importing Locations - Same Names Different Place

Well as it's the import wizard which was added on as I understand it I would have to disagree it is the programming of the import wizard to recognise that a location is not defined by it's name alone such as Harlem, Boston, London, Paris, Somerset. These places all exist in more than one location it's just we use an address or a grid reference to identify them uniquely.

Somehow I don't think we are going to agree. R6 was designed to reflect the real world I hope and it's the import wizard that does not see that.

Data Manger
Somerset Environmental Records Centre

TonyP's Website