Fix "View record" button on NPMS verification messages

[Sam-Amy]

Currently when a verifier (on iRecord) comments on an NPMS record, the user can see the comment on the notifications page of the NPMS website, but there is no way to respond to these comments. The only comments field that is available for editing via the 'edit record' button is at the sample level, and the 'view record' button takes you to the NPMS home page (see attached file for screenshots) testing how to respond to NPMS verifier comments.pdf

[sacrevert]

@andrewvanbreda I assume that the solution to this, whether on NPMS or on iRecord, is to include a link to the record details page so that a surveyor can respond to a comment. However, I'm not sure what this would mean for those NPMS surveyors without iRecord accounts. I also find it odd (both on iRecord and NPMS), that acknowledging a message seems to mean that it can no longer be seen. I would have thought it preferable that these would be retained for reference. Perhaps we have misunderstood something however. Perhaps @DavidRoy or someone else can comment

[DavidRoy]

Bouncing to @kitenetter

[kitenetter]

On iRecord, if you go to your "My notifications" page, the behaviour is the same as Sam's PDF describes, except that the "View record" button opens up the record in iRecord, and allows a comment to be added at that point.

So maybe the simplest solution is to enable a "View record" page within NPMS, so that people can see their records in the same way that they can on iRecord. @andrewvanbreda is that a reasonably easy win? It would also address the fact that the "View record" button is currently redundant.

Alternatively it might be possible to add a new button for "Reply to comment", but as far as I know we don't have a similar facility anywhere else in Indicia so that would be a new feature.

@sacrevert comments are retained with each individual record that they apply to, but there is no single listing of all comments across all records. Most feedback from users has been about being able to discard comments from the "My notifications" view. Retaining an 'archive' of read comments is probably possible, but would be another new feature and I'm not aware of any demand for it, but if you feel it is needed it could be added to the iRecord issues list (or developed as a bespoke requirement for NPMS).

[Sam-Amy]

In hindsight, don't really think the 'mark as read' is a problem as it is - as you say @kitenetter this behaviour is probably preferable. I just wasn't aware of it so was mildly inconvenient when trying to figure out if I could add a responding comment to the record.

[sacrevert]

@andrewvanbreda at some point, can you indicate how straightforward a job it would be to fix the "View record" button as indicated above?

@kitenetter @Sam-Amy personally I find the "Mark as read" behaviour confusing. Almost everyone will have encountered this option within email, where it just "marks as read" as indicated, and does not hide, archive or delete the message, so I don't really see how having this option do something different and unexpected in indicia is sensible. I will add it to the general iRecord issues list

[andrewvanbreda]

@Sam-Amy @kitenetter @sacrevert Sorry for delay.

In theory this should be easy, I can just add the Indicia View Details of a Record 2 page.

I guess the only thing is I am making the assumption that that page witll work with verification messages when it isn't running on the central veirification site which is iRecord. I guess the answer to that is problably be ok, but will have to see.

[andrewvanbreda]

@sacrevert I just tried experimenting with this on my test site.

There is an unexpected problem I hadn't anticipated (isn't there always)

So I added the Species Details page which takes an occurrence_id as parameter. However I realised the notification grids on NPMS are sample ID based. So when you click the Notepad icon it ,supplies a sample_id to allow editing of whole sample. This means the View Record page is always trying to provide a sample_id always, which isn't what we want as it is an occurrence that gets verified. I will have to come back to this after bank holiday, it will need code alteration in some way.

I guess the sensible thing to do for now is try to hide that View icon, currently it goes nowhere.

[Sam-Amy]

@sacrevert @andrewvanbreda Just to note I've updated my pdf above (also below) to also illustrate how clicking on the 'Edit record' button requires clicking past the location and sample details before arriving at the species details, and then the user can only delete/re-add a new species or add images, rather than actually edit the record in question (which I can see is why @sacrevert I couldn't re-find the record ID yesterday). This could be avoided if the 'View record' button can ultimately lead to the record, but in the meantime:

• should/could the 'Edit record' button actually say 'Edit sample'?

The other thing I noticed here is that when you click the 'Need more sophistication? Click here to use iRecord' link, it takes you to the home page of iRecord (even if logged in on the same account), so that the user than needs to navigate to Explore/My records and search for the record in question. This is inevitable as this link will sometimes be at the bottom of a whole sample, so I will incorporate this and the above into the NPMS guidance about verification:

• would it be helpful to have some detail here to explain they will need to do this? i.e. "You will need to navigate to any record you want to edit via Explore/My records"

Also, for the example I am looking at (https://irecord.org.uk/record-details?occurrence_id=16492513) there is no option to edit the record in the usual way in iRecord, though it is possible to add a comment. @andrewvanbreda is this the case for all NPMS data? i.e. can occurrences only be deleted and re-added from within the NPMS website?

testing how to respond to NPMS verifier comments_v2.pdf

[andrewvanbreda]

Hi @Sam-Amy OK, I will see if I can change the icon label if easy fix (unless it is more problematic than expected and so isn't worth the budget). I think in terms of NPMS terminology "Edit Survey" would be the best thing for it to say.

If everyone agreed (Oli, NPMSSupport, Rachel) then the recording forms could be changed so that species rows could be edited, we have that capability. Not allowing that at the moment is a design choice.

I will let @sacrevert comment on what is wants with the iRecord line, if it were deemed unsuitable, one option would be to link directly to the iRecord's My Records page.

In answer to your last question. Yes occurrences can only be deleted/re-added from the NPMS website, because other places like iRecord do not have the right data entry forms setup to do the editing. We might be able to pursuade NPMS to be able to allow adding of comments, if I can correct the problem I mentioned in my previous comment.

Andy

[sacrevert]

@andrewvanbreda (1) If people go back into their own samples via the relevant forms, then species records are editable I think (assuming one still owns the square), so I don't see why they aren't via this specific route to the sample. We should change that for sure, as some time ago we decided that people should be able to edit their samples (it was only very early in the scheme that they were locked after a year had elapsed).

(2) If the icon text can be amended, fine, but I would only do this if it is a 5 minute job, as it is fairly obvious what needs editing once one is back at the sample pages.

(3) Yes, ultimately it would be nice if we could allow responses to comments etc. via the NPMS site. It would also be good if We could allow the editing of records without going back through the entire sample. However, these both seem like major changes and I do not think that we can put resources into either of these things at this point in time. It would be best to fix (1) and (2) above under this item, and then create new issues for the others, as this issue thread is starting to combine too many things.

[andrewvanbreda]

1. I have switched the options on so editing is now available. It actually wasn't previously available, so I can only guess that you must of seen that on a test site.
2. Haven't checked yet.
3. This might not be much work. Either way I need to at least remove the icon that goes nowhere at the moment, I looked at that the other day and it is surprisingly difficult. So what I will do is just put the Indicia prebuilt form onto the site for viewing details/comments etc. Then it can be tested, it may not need customising. I hope it will just work.

[andrewvanbreda]

Actually forget what I said about point 3, I had forgotten I already looked into it so I think not that easy. However I will have a quick check of the code, as hiding the icon needs code changes too.

[sacrevert]

Thanks @andrewvanbreda I'm slightly perturbed by your answer to (1), as I am very sure that I have edited my own records within NPMS forms historically on the live site. Indeed, we have closed issues relating to this from an admin point of view, but i''m sure that we removed the "locked" sample feature of the site for normal users at some point in the last four years too.

[Sam-Amy]

@sacrevert @andrewvanbreda I have just checked again accessing a record on your account Oli via 'My Visits' and it you are right - it is possible to edit the individual occurrences (i.e. species name/cover). The example I was looking at previously was an 'Extra species', and with this (accessed via the verifier comment notification) it was not possible to edit the species name, only delete and re-add. Now looking at these extra records via 'My visits' I can't see how they can be changed at all as there is no 'edit' button next to them.

[sacrevert]

Thanks Sam. In that case it seems to me that it is only the icon labellign that is left under this issue. Editing extra species records is very low priority, and should be hived off into a separate issue. @Sam-Amy Can you open the extra species pages editing under a separate issue and label it "low" please @andrewvanbreda Can you limit this thread to the icon text, and open the following under a separate issue with low priorty as well please.

(3) Yes, ultimately it would be nice if we could allow responses to comments etc. via the NPMS site. It would also be good if We could allow the editing of records without going back through the entire sample. However, these both seem like major changes and I do not think that we can put resources into either of these things at this point in time. It would be best to fix (1) and (2) above under this item, and then create new issues for the others, as this issue thread is starting to combine too many things.

[andrewvanbreda]

Hi @sacrevert @Sam-Amy Yes the occurrences became editable on the data entry form as I changed it this afternoon, so yes those edits can now be made.

The edit link was always available on My Visit top grid, but you wouldn't of been able to edit a taxon name on the data entry form itself without deleting and re-adding. ( have also now changed it on Extra Species so it can do this too, as what was a 1 min job). I didn't change the My Visits page Extra Species grid until you raise that separately.

It is possible to edit Extra Species now though . Got to the Extra Species data entry page, and there is a grid of existing records. You should be able to edit from there.

In terms of previously not being able to access there Edit Icon on species. This is controlled server side, not the browser, so this function was previously not available. So I cannot think of any explanation for being able to edit, as it is blocked in PHP code before it even reaches the browser. The only things I can think of is

• Perhaps the old versions of the forms we had ages ago allowed it
• or on the old training site.
• Perhaps the edits were done on Wildflower which would allow editing cos you just need editing of the abundance numbers.

Otherwise someone would have had to change the option. I don't think that was ever done as far as I remember anyway.

Anyway, am limiting this thread to icon text only now and will raise that suggested issue separately.

[Sam-Amy]

Thanks @andrewvanbreda I see now you did say you had enabled editing before my last post, sorry - very efficient!

[sacrevert]

Thanks @andrewvanbreda from what you say I can see why i was confused. You say that deleting and re-adding taxa was always allowed, and it is this that I considered to be "editing" (it allowed changes to the form, and that was all I had in mind). No doubt editing individual records without deleting them is easier though, and better for the verification audit trail. Anyway, that is the root of my confusion. Seems like that issue is all in hand now anyway.

[Sam-Amy]

Sorry @sacrevert probably my fault your were confused as I was making this distinction between deleting and editing, because of the point you make re: verification audit trail

[Sam-Amy]

@andrewvanbreda can I just check please if you were going to hide the 'view record' icon (which currently takes the user back to the home page) for now as you mentioned above?:

"I guess the sensible thing to do for now is try to hide that View icon, currently it goes nowhere."

[andrewvanbreda]

@Sam-Amy Yes I will do that, or if simpler I will get the comment page to work. I have already tried to remove the icon, but it is more problematic than usual because of the way the grid is drawn to the screen.

[Sam-Amy]

OK, thanks @andrewvanbreda, just wanted to check progress as Rachel is going to put verification guidance on the website which currently includes this icon - this is fine though I will just amend when this is done. I wonder whether if it just took you to the same page (i.e. did nothing), rather than to the home page, it might be less confusing. Would this be possible/easy if the overall fix might take a while?

[andrewvanbreda]

@Sam-Amy Not started yet. The associated issue was advised to be opened at Low priority https://github.com/BiologicalRecordsCentre/NPMS/issues/292

I have just changed the page so it returns back to verification messages instead of homepage. The other alternative would be to take user to a page saying "Coming soon" or similar. To be honest, if it is an issue perhaps the 292 should be raised in priority (@sacrevert?)

[sacrevert]

No it's not a priority relative to your other work @andrewvanbreda @Sam-Amy please just proceed with the blog/guidance posting

[andrewvanbreda]

@sacrevert @Sam-Amy Have removed the icon so users are no longer shown a broken icon.

[sacrevert]

Further follow-up is in #292