I am testing S7 workbench for the first time, and am really appreciating the ease of access, but am also getting a bit confused. One of the aspects that I considered really valuable in the S6 interface is a view on new geography and taxonomy entries (as well as catalogue number), so that I could ensure quality-control on data imports.
I expected a similar view in S7, and am confused to have that validation combined with ‘all the other data fields too’. In this display of a dataset, I see some catalog numbers (first column) highlighted and others not (none are in the Specify) as well as highlights on some taxa, but not others (that appear to be the same?)
(compared to red flag in the first column which tells me record with this identifier is already in the system)
Why is Washington, USA highlighted blue in some lines and not others? I feel like the info I am looking for (eg. don’t import ‘Wahsington, USA’) isn’t visible like in S6?
But when I typo it on purpose (and save and re-validate), I don’t see a validation flag?
In the workbench documentation, I saw mention of a hierarchy for some of these actions, but I didn’t see these nuances described? Is there a way to configure this?
Or more in-depth description of what is being flagged, and how I can clear that to focus on the fields that are most relevant to our import?
Many thanks!
update, the behavior seemed to change when I cleared the real ‘errors’. I saved, and tried to re-validate, but each time the validation just seems to hang, and is taking significantly longer to progress (I tried to stop it, but got an error about trying to stop it).
more update: in terms of the validations; sounds like I need to be a bit more patient with the ‘background thinking’
Hi Heather,
I wanted to check in on this - I was told that a blue field meant that it would be added as a fresh field into the system (so in your example it would create a new “Washington” in the geography tree. I have been trying to carefully test this without gumming up the works too much but with mixed results. You said your solution was to check for any spelling anomalies and revalidate, and that made the blue fields become normal again before import?
Thank you for any advice!
Jacki
Hi Jacki,
I am not quite sure what you are asking. On my side, I am trying to understand the logic behind the validations, and why ‘Washington’ would be highlighted at all, since it is already in my tree, and why ‘Washintoon’ is not being flagged.
The validations in S7 seem to be following different logic than in S6, which I am more familiar with. We have a LOT of data to import, so I want to be sure I understand what S7 is flagging or not.
Cheers,
Heather
Hi Heather,
My question was very fuzzy, I agree, but this did help! I appreciate it.
Cheers,
Jack
Hi @JackWhisenant
I have a specific example, I am working on uploading some taxon lists, and I don’t understand why S7 is highlighting some rows as new, when they already exist in my tree? For example; Populus alba…
in my workbench
Current record in my taxon tree:
I DEFINITELY don’t want to upload the same taxon twice, but can’t check them all manually, please advise!
By contrast, Populus acuminata, looks the exact same in the workbench (workbench pic above), but isn’t in my tree at all!
Instead of just deleting above, I thought I’d leave it in case others did it too. In these cases, I found it was because I hadn’t populated the genus author, genus taxon status, AND certified “is hybrid = false” (because I have that mapped). Once I addressed those issues, the validation results looked much more like what I was expecting! “User error” (or at least user lack of insight on the finer points)
