search

NationalMuseumAustralia / Collection-API

The public web API of the National Museum of Australia
10 stars 0 forks source link

Rights statement when no associated image #27

Closed f27wood closed 5 years ago

f27wood commented 6 years ago

I've noticed that searching the Rights field, returns object records where there are no images associated with that object. This is because we are flagging the Creative Commons/Rights in the object record rather than the image, and some objects do not yet have an associated image, or the image has been restricted for the public API.

I am wondering if an object record does not have an associated image, whether it should be excluded from the rights search result. ? If possible and if a logical thing to do...?

Conal-Tuohy commented 6 years ago

I agree the API should not make any statements about rights in non-existent (or inaccessible) images.

We could fairly easily filter out rights statements where there are no images, using the existing TriX filtering step in the sparql-to-solr.xpl pipeline.

Incidentally, how is it that we have a rights statement at all in the case where there are no images at all? Are they just being assigned in a big sweep, whether there are images or not?

f27wood commented 6 years ago

To clarify - the rights statement doesn't show up in the object record, however the object is included in the search result.

And yes rights statements are being assigned to objects without images as we review by collection or an object type. The reason being that we are planning to eventually have images for all of the existing objects, so in the long term it is more efficient to review and mark up objects in logical groups. That way, once a photo of the object has been taken, the rights are already known.

staplegun commented 6 years ago

I decided this was easier to do during EMu ingest - then the rights statement won't appear anywhere.

Conal-Tuohy commented 6 years ago

Not sure about that, @staplegun, since an object may have no images listed in EMu but still have images in Piction, which should still be covered by licence specified in EMu.

What do you say, @f27wood ? Should Piction images be covered by the licence stated in the EMu record?

staplegun commented 6 years ago

Well spotted. I have reverted the commit removing rights during the EMu ingest, and instead added it to the redact step.

staplegun commented 6 years ago

This is working successfully

staplegun commented 6 years ago

To fix the four images with no rights - images should always have a right defined, so if there is no right then the images should be redacted.

staplegun commented 6 years ago

The searches in solr now both return zero results:

select?fq=media:*&fq=type:object&q=-rights:* = 0 results
select?fq=rights:*&fq=type:object&q=-media:* = 0 results
f27wood commented 6 years ago

I think this has been resolved as the rights statement is now with the image, noting that restricted images are displaying, when they should not. See https://github.com/NationalMuseumAustralia/Collection-API/issues/75

staplegun commented 5 years ago

Confirmed in production (both return 0 results)

https://data.nma.gov.au/solr/core_nma_internal/select?fl=id&fq=media:*&fq=type:object&q=-rights: https://data.nma.gov.au/solr/core_nma_internal/select?fl=id&fq=rights:&fq=type:object&q=-media:*