You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We need a way to change tree species. This is not a trivial issue, considering the surveys are custom for each tree - so changing the species opens up the question of, how do handle all of the former species-specific data?
I'll have to think on this. Maybe we can leave all data as is, except add a new column to denote a tree as a corrected_species. Then display the corrected species name instead, but otherwise leave data as is... this is the simplest solution I can think of, and preserves the existing infrastructure. We'd just have to adjust search queries accordingly, to include the corrected_species field. @mestato do you think that would suffice?
The only con that I can think of:
this would not actually adjust the survey data for that tree. i.e. a tree mis-categorized as American Chestnut that's actually a hemlock? After being relabeled as Hemlock, the Hemlock survey wouldn't show up for that tree. Do we think that's a problem?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Look at how iNaturalist handles it, which is more complex but considered the research standard. People can agree or disagree about the initial species (we have a check mark/x system now) but also suggest a new id (we don’t have that yet). There’s a comments section (might be overkill) and if enough experts agree, the observation is assigned to “Research Grade” status (this seems useful). This would take TACF support but if we put together a plan and a budget, Meg can ask for it
We need a way to change tree species. This is not a trivial issue, considering the surveys are custom for each tree - so changing the species opens up the question of, how do handle all of the former species-specific data?
I'll have to think on this. Maybe we can leave all data as is, except add a new column to denote a tree as a
corrected_species
. Then display the corrected species name instead, but otherwise leave data as is... this is the simplest solution I can think of, and preserves the existing infrastructure. We'd just have to adjust search queries accordingly, to include thecorrected_species
field. @mestato do you think that would suffice?The only con that I can think of:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: