Create customizable searches and search results by collection/collection type

[campmlc]

To allow each collection or type of collection (birds, fish, cultural etc) to have the ability to customize the search and download fields for data types specific to collection.

[campmlc]

This would include getting rid of mandatory default search results, e.g sex, which may not be relevant to the collection type (cultural, etc)

[campmlc]

See #1265 2.

[KyndallH]

How would this work for the public that is searching multiple institutions? Or are you saying that all mammal collections on Arctos would have the same search and download fields that are different than the bird collections? Don't they kind of already? I guess I need more information on where this is going.

I like the current setup where the user can select what is viewed on the results page and what is downloaded.

[AJLinn]

This would include getting rid of mandatory default search results, e.g sex, which may not be relevant to the collection type (cultural, etc)

While I do use the customize results & downloads check boxes, I would LOVE to be able to get rid of some of those "mandatory" fields (decimal latitude, decimal longitude, coordinate error, sex). The locality info our users are most interested in is "specific locality" (unless by removing those we lose the cool mapping function on the top of the search results page). Sex is a totally useless field for the majority of the UAM:EH collections and probably most of the UAM:Arc as well (some faunal or human remains items could have sex noted).

And when I download results, I end up having to delete about 7 columns before I can do anything with the spreadsheet.

[campmlc]

I'm wondering if we can do this via the portals page, so that the customization occurs only for the specific collections portal but not for a general Arctos search? But it would also work to have search and display settings common to collection type, if we can all agree on that. This was a request from a new fish collection - because critical data that ichthyologists need to search on is left out or not easily searchable by researchers/general public unfamiliar with Arctos and all the different options available. This would greatly simplify the overwhelming visual clutter that comes with so many options.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Angela Linn notifications@github.com wrote:

This would include getting rid of mandatory default search results, e.g sex, which may not be relevant to the collection type (cultural, etc)

While I do use the customize results & downloads check boxes, I would LOVE to be able to get rid of some of those "mandatory" fields (decimal latitude, decimal longitude, coordinate error, sex). The locality info our users are most interested in is "specific locality" (unless by removing those we lose the cool mapping function on the top of the search results page). Sex is a totally useless field for the majority of the UAM:EH collections and probably most of the UAM:Arc as well (some faunal or human remains items could have sex noted).

[image: ss_results] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17605945/30502957-d4d0e884-9a14-11e7-9c98-bbda397cbcc8.jpeg

And when I download results, I end up having to delete about 7 columns before I can do anything with the spreadsheet. [image: ss_results-download] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17605945/30502998-01c4d422-9a15-11e7-910e-fe51b92a0c52.jpeg

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1269#issuecomment-329899187, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AOH0hPCfem7uw80293zK4-ZWBM5iClTuks5siuRNgaJpZM4PZbwJ .

[AJLinn]

because critical data that ichthyologists need to search on is left out or not easily searchable by researchers/general public unfamiliar with Arctos and all the different options available.

if we're talking about simplifying the search options then let me tell you about some customization needs... try having to tell a Tribal Elder to look under "Biological Individual" to search for "Culture of Origin" for objects from their cultural region.

Customizing results of a search is one thing and having custom search pages is another. I am ALL in favor of doing that. My understanding from @dustymc was that this was a much bigger deal and would likely require grant funding to allocate the time to do it.

[dustymc]

This is more or less a duplicate of #1185, #907, #470 and is dependent on #1067 (It's hard to customize portals if we don't have portals!). FWIW, I think I'm in favor of getting rid of portals altogether - it's not clear to me what they do, other than confuse users.

I think having everything change when you enter/exit a portal would only add to that confusion. If we're going to customize, maybe we should go the other way and harden the portal split - make them run at their own URL (http://some-collection.arctos.database.museum or etc.) so it's more obvious that the user has entered/left "all of Arctos."

Spatial data (coordinates+error) are inseparable, and must be included in results to display maps. It might be possible to hide them somehow anyway.

Further customizing portals probably requires development funding, and this seems like something that would end up much better if it involved a meeting to discuss the details/goals/etc.

@AJLinn yea that's a little crazy - better suggestions for labeling that "pane" of specimensearch? "Cataloged item details??"

FYI, here are current results defaults - it's easy to change them. In addition to the "normal" stuff, licensing info is added to everything and probably can't/shouldn't be removed, and I think we're settled on force-adding a "cite_this_as" column once the details are resolved (#1130).

select cf_variable from ssrch_field_doc where CATEGORY='required';

CF_VARIABLE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
country
verbatim_date
coordinateuncertaintyinmeters
dec_lat
dec_long
sex
guid
state_prov
scientific_name
spec_locality

[campmlc]

This would be the only reason I can think of to KEEP portals - having a customizable search and results screen for each collection that we can link to from our website. I think a meeting is a good idea - another Arctos Workshop?

I'm in favor of changing "Biological Individual" to "Cataloged Item" or "Specimen Record". That solves the problem with cataloged items that are lots, not individuals, as well.

Scientific Name" is also problematic for non-biological individuals. "Identification" would be better.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:39 PM, dustymc notifications@github.com wrote:

This is more or less a duplicate of #1185 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1185, #907 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/907, #470 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/470 and is dependent on #1067 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1067 (It's hard to customize portals if we don't have portals!). FWIW, I think I'm in favor of getting rid of portals altogether - it's not clear to me what they do, other than confuse users.

I think having everything change when you enter/exit a portal would only add to that confusion. If we're going to customize, maybe we should go the other way and harden the portal split - make them run at their own URL ( http://some-collection.arctos.database.museum or etc.) so it's more obvious that the user has entered/left "all of Arctos."

Spatial data (coordinates+error) are inseparable, and must be included in results to display maps. It might be possible to hide them somehow anyway.

Further customizing portals probably requires development funding, and this seems like something that would end up much better if it involved a meeting to discuss the details/goals/etc.

@AJLinn https://github.com/ajlinn yea that's a little crazy - better suggestions for labeling that "pane" of specimensearch? "Cataloged item details??"

FYI, here are current results defaults - it's easy to change them. In addition to the "normal" stuff, licensing info is added to everything and probably can't/shouldn't be removed, and I think we're settled on force-adding a "cite_this_as" column once the details are resolved (#1130 https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1130).

select cf_variable from ssrch_field_doc where CATEGORY='required';

CF_VARIABLE

country verbatim_date coordinateuncertaintyinmeters dec_lat dec_long sex guid state_prov scientific_name spec_locality

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1269#issuecomment-329910379, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AOH0hEDrmhTD_Bpng8csTQnSdBkANHUFks5siu50gaJpZM4PZbwJ .

[dustymc]

We can get rid of portals and retain the portal links - http://arctos.database.museum/msb_mamm would just pre-select a collection (or similar).

Portals are probably necessary if customization is desired.

I think I like "identification" better than scientific name (and we have two very different concepts called scientific name).

I don't think @DerekSikes likes "specimen" (despite the disclaimer on http://handbook.arctosdb.org/documentation/catalog.html!) and I'm not sure anyone who's "not us" knows what a cataloged item is. Either still seems better than "biological individual"....

[DerekSikes]

"Specimen" should be improved by replacing with 'Specimen record'. A very simple change that fixes lots of problems!

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:35 PM, dustymc notifications@github.com wrote:

We can get rid of portals and retain the portal links - http://arctos.database.museum/msb_mamm would just pre-select a collection (or similar).

Portals are probably necessary if customization is desired.

I think I like "identification" better than scientific name (and we have two very different concepts called scientific name).

I don't think @DerekSikes https://github.com/dereksikes likes "specimen" (despite the disclaimer on http://handbook.arctosdb.org/ documentation/catalog.html!) and I'm not sure anyone who's "not us" knows what a cataloged item is. Either still seems better than "biological individual"....

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1269#issuecomment-329919389, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIraM5bEbHR6KL6EGzE2fgVFUEXNMu-Oks5sivuVgaJpZM4PZbwJ .

--

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Derek S. Sikes, Curator of Insects Associate Professor of Entomology University of Alaska Museum 1962 Yukon Drive Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960

dssikes@alaska.edu

phone: 907-474-6278 FAX: 907-474-5469

University of Alaska Museum - search 347,746 digitized arthropod records http://arctos.database.museum/uam_ento_all http://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/ento/ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interested in Alaskan Entomology? Join the Alaska Entomological Society and / or sign up for the email listserv "Alaska Entomological Network" at http://www.akentsoc.org/contact_us http://www.akentsoc.org/contact.php

[dustymc]

Next release replaces the "Biological Individual" pane with the "Specimen Record" pane.

@campmlc where are you seeing "scientific name"?

[AJLinn]

I'm in favor of changing "Biological Individual" to "Cataloged Item" or "Specimen Record". That solves the problem with cataloged items that are lots, not individuals, as well.

Next release replaces the "Biological Individual" pane with the "Specimen Record" pane.

Sorry for not jumping in here earlier with a comment on this. In terms of cultural collections, I'm afraid that references to "specimen" may be seen as culturally insensitive to Indigenous people using our system. This is one of the terms we hear the most push-back on, in terms of viewing people's cultural heritage as "scientific possessions" when to many of them, some of the objects can be viewed as living things and in the case of human remains, their ancestors.

I'm not sure what a more culturally-sensitive term might be other than "cataloged item" or "object record" but specimen record is not going to be good for many of our users.

A couple of screen shots from museum databases with anthropological collections: NMAI

AMNH

Reciprocal Research Network (UBC Museum of Anthropology)

Thanks for considering this complication and again, sorry to be slow to respond. I'm at a museum conference right now in Edmonton, AB with many Indigenous people so this is something I'm thinking and hearing a lot about over the past few days.

[dustymc]

The big picture here now has a path to a solution: use the API to write your own UIs (which may need a new issue - eg can we provide a template? Should "we" maintain those? Etc., etc. Hopefully the answers to some of that will become apparent as ALMNH develops their UI.)

All of the sub-issues seem to be addressed elsewhere as well.

Tentatively closing.