1 Topic by BDeed

  • BDeed
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Bolton
  • Registered: 01-03-2011
  • Posts: 447

Topic: Linking user databases

I've been using Indicia in various forms for a little while now and it has been bothering me as to how users are managed across the various sites. For example i have previously signed up (and used) iRecord. I then began creating the MBB website and signed up again.

I have however just signed up to the NFBR site (which is Indicia based) and it recognised both the MBB site and iRecord allowing me to verify if i had also signed up to those sites. Superb function!

However, those doesn't seem to have been available to people signing up to the MBB site? Is this a new function or something i have to manually add on? I would like for it to be available and it makes absolute sense to enable users to link their accounts where they choose to do so. (it also a nice way of flagging up that these sites are linked!).

Ultimately, it would be interesting if it were possible for a users (at least ad hoc) records to be visible between sites. Again, underlining the connectivity and preventing duplication.

Natural History & Biodiversity Data Enthusiast

2 Reply by Jim Bacon

  • Jim Bacon
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: BRC
  • Registered: 03-11-2008
  • Posts: 980

Re: Linking user databases

Hi

The Easy Login module performs the function of associating Drupal users of client websites to single user accounts on a shared warehouse. See http://indicia-docs.readthedocs.io/en/l … login.html
It does this automatically without user interaction unless there is some uncertainty and then user confirmation is requested. Almost certainly MBB has the same behaviour as NFBR but you just haven't encountered it. We had not thought to highlight this behaviour to users but that might be an interesting idea.

Your thought to make records visible between sites exactly mirrors our train of thought and it is possible through making sharing agreements between sites. See http://indicia-docs.readthedocs.io/en/l … ents.html. We have used this, for example, with iRecord, which, among other things, offers to make agreements with other sites for verification so that the effort and expertise of verifiers can be focussed in one place.

Jim Bacon.

3 Reply by BDeed

  • BDeed
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Bolton
  • Registered: 01-03-2011
  • Posts: 447

Re: Linking user databases

Cheers Jim, just checked and i haven't messed around with Easy Login so i suspect you're right and I've just not encountered this.
Sounds spot on and more or less how i understood the verification process to work.

Though perhaps i understood it to be a bit more of a one way street with records going 'up' to iRecord but records from there not being visible through other client sites? I fully expect this may be a desired behaviour for some but i am in danger of drifting off point!

I have been having difficulty focusing the MBB Indicia on North Merseyside. As a LERC we cover a very defined area though i don't expect recorders to hold to it! I envisioned that via the MBB site users would get tailored/contextualised recording forms to target recording on sensitive local areas where information was most needed with perhaps bespoke surveys where we run particular projects (e.g. around LWS).

However, records for outside the LERC area should not be 'visible' generally on the site. They might be visible to the user on the site and should certainly be visible 'upwards' on iRecord (ideally tied to their account there) so accessible to NSS and other LERCs.

More simply put i would like to filter records on the site so only records in North Merseyside are generally accessible! It isn't working and filters appear to be ignored (demonstrated by death by Buzzard http://www.activenaturalist.org.uk/mbb/node/152)..

Natural History & Biodiversity Data Enthusiast

4 Reply by Jim Bacon

  • Jim Bacon
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: BRC
  • Registered: 03-11-2008
  • Posts: 980

Re: Linking user databases

Hi

I've just registered with your site in order to follow the link you posted. In doing so I got a message "Your user account link to the central records database has been updated." which was Easy Login saying it has successfully updated my account on the warehouse.

The sharing of records between two websites is a private affair but, optionally, a two way street. If A shares with B and C shares with B that does not mean A and C have any sort of sharing. However the agreement between A and B could allow B to verify records submitted at A and A to display records submitted at B.

Moving on, I gather you would like recording forms to target specific locations. That is certainly possible. I have done a simple version where records were submitted for pre-defined locations selected from a drop-down list rather than by clicking on a map. I feel pretty sure someone will have done a two-tier arrangement where you select a general location from a list, e.g. a nature reserve, and then click the exact location on a map showing the site boundary.

When presenting back records to users, the report that is run and the parameters that the report is supplied with should constrain what is visible. I can see on your All Records page is showing records outside the displayed boundary. Sounds to me like we need to check that a.) you are using a report which accepts a location_id parameter and that b.) you are correctly supplying the location_id for MBB (1464). If you'd like to delve in to this problem a bit more, would you be so kind as to start a new topic with appropriate title.

Jim Bacon.

5 Reply by BDeed

  • BDeed
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Bolton
  • Registered: 01-03-2011
  • Posts: 447

Re: Linking user databases

Hi Jim,

Glad Easy Login is working. Thanks for testing.
Thanks for explaining. That is the route i envision taking!

I would, back in the day when i had some time to put to this i tried uploading all of our LWS boundaries to the warehouse so they could be used in filters. I envisioned we might have a dynamic record entry form somewhat like your example where people could select the site and they would be directed to a form which displayed the boundary and perhaps other recent records entered for the site. Unfortunately my shape file kept getting rejected on import and i eventually got called to other things.

I suspect i am calling the MBB boundary in the wrong way (or using the wrong report). I'll set a new thread when i've some time to tackle this in a bit more depth.

Thanks again,
Ben

Natural History & Biodiversity Data Enthusiast

6 Reply by Jim Bacon

  • Jim Bacon
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: BRC
  • Registered: 03-11-2008
  • Posts: 980

Re: Linking user databases

I haven't imported a shape file for a long while. My recollection is that the PostgreSQL/PostGIS database can be more limited than the GIS systems from which the shape files are generated but that there are methods to simplify geometries before creating the shape files which help. This is another topic worth discussing when you get back to it.

Jim Bacon.