input field

[bradfordcondon]

Why provide a field? Because without it, we can't hook into HQ very easily. Maybe we'll think of another way and not provide a field, i dunno.

the field should -

base field

simply the value of the corresponding NCBI accession

formatter

not necessary since hte acession will show up indbxref.

widget

input text field for the accession, with a "search" button.

Pressing search should display a summary of the record that will be imported if provided.

The form should then rebuild either A) with the fields populated (problematic for linked fields such as contacts, dbxrefs, properties that dont exist yet, etc), or b) simply displaying the summary in the widget. On submit, we then deal with the other fields, either filling them out by hand, or creating and publishing the chado record...

option b) sounds better, but really makes me wonder if we shouldnt be trying to go the field route at all.

[bradfordcondon]

@almasaeed2010 has kindly reminded me that we can overwrite the form submit. Doing so would allow us to simply insert the record(s) into chado instead of trying to create the entity via fields.

So I guess we would check if the field is attached and if it has a valdi accession, and if so, run an EUTils creation script instead of the expected tripal entity creation.

At that point I wonder what we get out of attaching a field to the bundle creator anyway... easy integration into HQ is the obvious answer... still.

ah another thing would be the ability to have other fields that the user fills out, that arent pulled from NCBI! yeah, this is worth figuring out.

[bradfordcondon]

i thought that eutils would insert the record, we would publish the object, and the hq submission creation request would turn into an edit request with teh additional fields.
when you approve the record, you would create it in chado wiht eutils, publish it, then edit it and tack on whatever fields the user also submitted, if that makes sense.