Code Table Request - Code Table Request - DZTB: Denver Zoology Tissue Bird

dustymc commented 1 year ago

Instructions

This is a template to facilitate communication with the Arctos Code Table Committee. Submit a separate request for each relevant value. This form is appropriate for exploring how data may best be stored, for adding vocabulary, or for updating existing definitions.

Reviewing documentation before proceeding will result in a more enjoyable experience.

Initial Request

Goal: Describe what you're trying to accomplish. This is the only necessary step to start this process. The Committee is available to assist with all other steps. Please clearly indicate any uncertainty or desired guidance if you proceed beyond this step.

All DZTB: Denver Zoology Tissue Bird should be replaced with other ID type = other identifier and issued by agent Denver Museum of Nature and Science Bird Tissue Collection

Proposed Value: Proposed new value. This should be clear and compatible with similar values in the relevant table and across Arctos.

Proposed Definition: Clear, complete, non-collection-type-specific functional definition of the value. Avoid discipline-specific terminology if possible, include parenthetically if unavoidable.

Context: Describe why this new value is necessary and existing values are not.

Table: Code Tables are http://arctos.database.museum/info/ctDocumentation.cfm. Link to the specific table or value. This may involve multiple tables and will control datatype for Attributes. OtherID requests require BaseURL (and example) or explanation. Please ask for assistance if unsure.

Collection type: Some code tables contain collection-type-specific values. collection_cde may be found from https://arctos.database.museum/home.cfm

Priority: Please describe the urgency and/or choose a priority-label to the right. You should expect a response within two working days, and may utilize Arctos Contacts if you feel response is lacking.

Available for Public View: Most data are by default publicly available. Describe any necessary access restrictions.

Project: Add the issue to the Code Table Management Project.

Discussion: Please reach out to anyone who might be affected by this change. Leave a comment or add this to the Committee agenda if you believe more focused conversation is necessary.

Approval

All of the following must be checked before this may proceed.

The How-To Document should be followed. Pay particular attention to terminology (with emphasis on consistency) and documentation (with emphasis on functionality).

[ ] Code Table Administrator[1] - check and initial, comment, or thumbs-up to indicate that the request complies with the how-to documentation and has your approval
[ ] Code Table Administrator[2] - check and initial, comment, or thumbs-up to indicate that the request complies with the how-to documentation and has your approval
[ ] DBA - The request is functionally acceptable. The term is not a functional duplicate, and is compatible with existing data and code.
[ ] DBA - Appropriate code or handlers are in place as necessary. (ID_References, Media Relationships, Encumbrances, etc. require particular attention)

Rejection

If you believe this request should not proceed, explain why here. Suggest any changes that would make the change acceptable, alternate (usually existing) paths to the same goals, etc.

Can a suitable solution be found here? If not, proceed to (2)
Can a suitable solution be found by Code Table Committee discussion? If not, proceed to (3)
Take the discussion to a monthly Arctos Working Group meeting for final resolution.

Implementation

Once all of the Approval Checklist is appropriately checked and there are no Rejection comments, or in special circumstances by decree of the Arctos Working Group, the change may be made.

Review everything one last time. Ensure the How-To has been followed. Ensure all checks have been made by appropriate personnel.

Make changes as described above. Ensure the URL of this Issue is included in the definition.

Close this Issue.

DO NOT modify Arctos Authorities in any way before all points in this Issue have been fully addressed; data loss may result.

Special Exemptions

In very specific cases and by prior approval of The Committee, the approval process may be skipped, and implementation requirements may be slightly altered. Please note here if you are proceeding under one of these use cases.

Adding an existing term to additional collection types may proceed immediately and without discussion, but doing so may also subject users to future cleanup efforts. If time allows, please review the term and definition as part of this step.
The Committee may grant special access on particular tables to particular users. This should be exercised with great caution only after several smooth test cases, and generally limited to "taxonomy-like" data such as International Commission on Stratigraphy terminology.

dustymc commented 1 year ago

I will plan on proceeding with this about 2023-03-27 if there are no objections.

I will proceed immediately upon approval of each of the involved collections.

Data: temp_dztb_denver_zoology_tissue_bird.csv.zip

Summary:	guid_prefix	numrecs
DMNS:Bird	15339
DMNS:Egg	1
DMNS:Mamm	7
DMNS:Para	23

Users: @acdoll @jrdemboski

dustymc commented 1 month ago

@acdoll is this a "local" identifier?

used in a collection, not meant for eg citation
no issued_by appropriate
(optionally integer-only)

If so can we drop the : Denver Zoology Tissue Bird bit and update documentation and handlers?

(A bunch of XXX-INVALID messes could not survive all of that, but type-control is not necessary.)

acdoll commented 1 month ago

Yes, this is a local identifier. I'm not entirely sure what is being proposed now. Keeping "DZTB" as an identifier_type and doing away with the issuer Denver Museum of Nature and Science Bird Tissue Collection? This is essentially an integer - we can deal with removing the INVALIDS and track that elsewhere.

dustymc commented 1 month ago

@acdoll anything to get us out of this awful purgatory!

We can change to an agent-based format and do whatever you need to support that.

We can change this to a 'local' identifier (not because they're necessary, but because we clearly can't get rid of them!) and do whatever you need to support that.

Both are equally functional, IF the scope of use is "the people who use this know what it means and there can be no ambiguity or misuse." If things are any more complicated than that then the agent-based model is really necessary to carry sufficient data.

No cleanup should be necessary for either direction, but both can carry data requirements (eg 'is integer' or whatever). I'm happy to help with any cleanup you'd like to do, before or after any transformation, and rules can be added at any time. (But again aren't necessary, just an easy way for you to prevent nonsense before it becomes some sort of horror.)

Let me know what I can do to move this forward.

ArctosDB / arctos