search

ArctosDB / arctos

Arctos is a museum collections management system
https://arctos.database.museum
Apache License 2.0
57 stars 13 forks source link

tissue search #7659

Open dustymc opened 2 months ago

dustymc commented 2 months ago

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

From a Curator:

If you go to Arctos without logging in and search for "UAM:Mamm" and enter "tissue" in Parts, 45,251 returns. This, I believe, is what most non-Arctosians would reasonably expect to give them a reasonably accurate number. If you search for "UAM:Mamm" and are familiar enough with Arctos to know to customize and put "tissue=yes" (not a reasonable expectation, I would argue), 79,281 returns. If you search VertNet--which has not added any new UAM mammal records for night on 2 or 3 years now and specify "UAM", "Mammalia", and "has tissues", estimated 112,409 returns. A colleague (and fellow curator at another museum who is very well versed in these things) just pointed these discrepancies out to me and I am passing it along.

Describe what you're trying to accomplish

Facilitate users getting what they want.

Describe the solution you'd like

Not a clue....

Describe alternatives you've considered

Collections can direct their audience to a non-default search, eg https://arctos.database.museum/search.cfm?sp=preset_default&guid_prefix=UAM:Mamm&is_tissue=1 sets search terms, sets results columns, and pre-fills collection and tissue requirements.

I could explore the possibility of the string tissue doing something special in Part Search, but I suspect I don't have the CPU to pull it off and it would cause mass confusion if I did.

Additional context

This is probably compounded by some collections (in and out of Arctos) calling all squishybits 'tissue' instead of naming parts.

Priority

?

campmlc commented 2 months ago

I agree this is a problem that needs a broad solution. MSB does not use "tissue" as part name unless we have no other info as we put different kinds of tissue in different vials that are explicitly searchable on "liver" or "heart,kidney". But users shouldn't have to know that. I like the idea of a general "tissue" search that would pull anything acceptable for "tissueness". I also like a customizable search that we can add to our collections page or send to people with the needed values preset so no one has to guess. Eventually in some future reality we'd have individual collection pages with interfaces customized through the API - but we need something functional now, not in make-a-wish science fiction, which is where that exists at least for our institution.

campmlc commented 2 months ago

I'd say priority = high, and I'd be happy to try to brainstorm a solution with other interested parties.