1 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Import wizard and determinations

I have an excel spreadsheet of sand lizard records with various combinations of multiple recorders (names separated by semicolons in the relevant field). The records have been supplied to me by one of our sand lizard experts and can all be regarded as verified.

I want to import them into Recorder and I want them all to have a determination type of 'considered correct' (and therefore verified). I would be happy to use the name of the person who has supplied me the records as the determiner with the role 'specialist'.

But how best to do that?

Although I can add a column to my spreadsheet with the name of the determiner, the import wizard wants to assign the role of 'original recorder' to this person which is innacurate. There does not seem to be the option to match a column to a value for the determiner's role.

Furthermore, there does not seem to be an option for me to match a column to a value for determination type which always comes through as 'Unconfirmed'.

If the only way forward is for me to do this as a two stage process, adding a new determination to each record after they have been imported by the wizard (via a batch update), then I would want to leave the determiner unmatched during the import so that the recorders are used as the 'original recorder' for the default 'unconfirmed' determination.

That brings me to another problem. If the recorders for a record are indicated as 'Jane Bloggs; Fred Blogss' then although separate references to each of these appears for the recorder, the default determination record will use the full string 'Jane Bloggs; Fred Bloggs' as the name of the determiner and I have to create a new entry in the names list to cope with that.

I have two questions:

1. Is there a better alternative to the two-step process I have described in order to import all the records and mark them corrected as verified?

2. Is there a better way to cope with multiple recorders when it comes to the default determination record?

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Rich

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website

2 Reply by sallyrankin

  • sallyrankin
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • Registered: 07-04-2006
  • Posts: 371

Re: Import wizard and determinations

At present, observations go into Recorder 6 with determination type set to 'Unconfirmed' so users need to enter the observations then edit them either via the user interface or by using a batch update. Batch updates along the lines of those mentioned in http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?pid=4035#p4035 (the problem with filters is supposed to be fixed in v6.14.4.212) or http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?pid=5728#p5728 could be used. However, I have just confirmed with JNCC that Determiner Type and Determiner Role will be column types that you can import via the import wizard in the next version. Testing of this version is planned for late April, early May so it should be released sometime after that. Unfortunately the budget didn't run to including these fields on the data entry screens in the user interface (Data Entry – Enter a species record or Data Entry – Enter Species for a place).

A taxon determination in Recorder 6 can only have one determiner hence the import wizard only copes correctly with one name in the Determiner column. If users want 2 or more people on a determination they have to fudge it by creating an individual like 'Jane Bloggs; Fred Bloggs'. To my knowledge there are no plans to allow a determination to have 2 determiners. It could be argued that naming one of them as the determiner is sufficient, especially if they are both listed as recorders. If the wizard added 2 determinations you would need to decide which should be the preferred one.

Sally Rankin, JNCC Recorder Approved Expert
E-mail: s.rankin@btinternet.com
Telephone: 01491 578633
Mobile: 07941 207687

3 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Import wizard and determinations

Thanks Sally - that's really good news about support for determiner type and role being added to the import wizard soon.

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website

4 Reply by johnvanbreda

  • johnvanbreda
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: UK
  • Registered: 27-04-2006
  • Posts: 1,237

Re: Import wizard and determinations

It's a good question though, should a determination be allowed 2 determiners? I think the intended intention of the determination was to identify the single "point of authority", and that if 2 people determine something as the same thing, then it is 2 determinations. Of course the other consideration is whether handling these rare cases is worth the extra complexity in the data model, since having multiple determiners would require an extra table.

John van Breda
Biodiverse IT

johnvanbreda's Website

5 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Import wizard and determinations

The question of whether or not a determination should be allowed two determiners must be considered in the context of what happens in the real world rather than what software developers intended. Although single determinations made by agreement amongst more than one person are not as frequent as single person determinations, my experience here suggests that it is not a rare thing either.

In Recorder, a determination must accompany every record - not an unreasonable rule. But requiring a 'single point of authority' can create a problem when records have multiple recorders and no single determiner is identified. This is not an uncommon situation, especially when records are being harvested from written reports etc. It is rarely feasible to contact the original recorders in these situations to see who they want to identify as the determiner (and may not always be politic either).

Recorder already has a complex data model which reflects the complex and diverse patterns of biological recording around us. To a large extent, we have to put up with complexity in the data model if we want software which copes with all the information we need to record.

But I understand that every development and refinement must be subjected to a cost benefit analysis and that adding complexity to the data model increases the cost considerably. I accept that this makes a development to allow 'two determiner determinations' a lower priority (and therefore less likely to happen), but it does not diminish the potential benefits.

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website