1

Topic: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

If I use api/taxonObservations/species to get species summaries then within the response I get taxon.taxonOutputGroupName and taxon.commonName both of which are useful in preparing reports. e.g. I can sort the information into taxonomic groups and present common names alongside scientific names, and can also sort by common name.

However if I use api/taxonObservations to get the records I get neither the taxonomic group nor the common names in the response. All I seem to be able to do is sort by scientific name. How can I show the taxonomic groups and common names in my report (and be able to sort by these) please?

Also, I am showing "fullVersion" in the report to indicate if the record is being displayed with its full resolution. This however is only showing as "true" where I have been granted enhanced access to the dataset. If the dataset has full public access "fullVersion" is reported as "false". Shouldn't such records be reported as "true"?

If "fullVersion" only means "enhanced access" then how can I identify and indicate those records that have full public access please? (e.g. the grid reference in the response is the best available)

Keith

2

Re: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

Hi Keith,

With fully public records they should show up as fullVersion being true, the issue here being that they may not be full access, to be completely fully publicly accessible they need recorder names and attributes to be visible as well, do the public datasets in this case have this showing up?

Matt

Matt Debont
Application Developer
Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough PE1 1JY, UK

3 (edited by kbalmer 24-10-2014 16:13:01)

Re: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

Hi Matt,

Here are the responses and dataset access rights of four different datasets:

GA000012
fullVersion = false
publicAttribute = false
Public access: records available at 1km
Other attributes do exist


GA000144
fullVersion = false
publicAttribute = false
Public access: records available at 100m with recorder names
Other attributes do exist


GA001094
fullVersion = false
publicAttribute = true
Public access: records available at 100m with recorder names and attributes
No other attributes exist


GA000423
fullVersion = false
publicAttribute = true
Public access: records available at 100m with recorder names and attributes
Other attributes do exist


The last three datasets are presenting records at the finest possible resolution. I can probably use publicAttribute being true to deduce that a record is presented at the finest possible resolution (i.e. the last two datasets).

I can't tell though that the first dataset's records aren't presented at finest possible resolution as the returned info is the same as for the second dataset, which is. It looks like I have to do other calls to the metadata to be able to find this out.

What I'd really like is something that says the record in the response is at the finest possible resolution, or better still, what resolution the record would have if it was accessed using enhanced access which is completely indeterminable by any means as far as I know? e.g. If I have been presented with a 2km record from a dataset with 2km public access, would it be presented at 2km, 1km or 100m resolution if I was to ask for enhanced access? This could be easily achieved by returning the two record resolutions - public and enhanced.

You didn't comment on the lack of taxonomic group and common name information which I would rank with higher priority. Is there any possiblity of these being provided too please?

Regards, Keith

4

Re: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

I am taking another look at how to present common name and taxonomic group information within reported records.

It appears that I have to do the query twice; once using using api/taxonObservations to get the records (but without getting the common name and taxonomic group); and again using api/taxonObservations/species to get the summary of taxa which does include the common name and taxonomic group; then stitch the two sets of results together?!

This seems daft, but given the deficiency of common name and taxonomic group in the api/taxonObservations report I can currently see no other way to acheive the objective? Is there a better way please?

Is it impossible to provide common name and taxonomic group in api/taxonObservations results which would seem to be the obvious approach...?

Keith

5

Re: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

Hi, it looks like you are correct, I can add a ticket to try and add these fields into the response in the future, but I can't give an estimate of how long that would take to do right now as my time is mostly on other projects right now.

Matt

Matt Debont
Application Developer
Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough PE1 1JY, UK

6

Re: api/taxonObservations response deficiencies

I think that would be a useful enhancement so please add a ticket Matt.

In the meantime I now have my two-query workaround working successfully.

Keith