Closed dagendresen closed 2 years ago
When they say "check", do you understand what they mean? I am not sure if they mean exclude/don't publish records without coordinates, or that we should ask DNV to georeference these records?
I guess they mean doing something with the geocoordinate strings reported as "inf". (Simply making these "inf" values NULL).
Maybe these are some (error) output from a function converting from the UTM zone 33N (EPSG:32633) geocoordinates indicated as the verbatim source format.
However, would we dare to do something like "translating" "inf" to "NULL"??? (Maybe test on a test IPT first)
I added occurrenceStatus = present
Doing something with the country is more demanding because there are multiple countries that the points in the sea are interpreted as... maybe be bold and just "claim" all the respective waters as Norway :-D
Maybe GBIF is wrong...? Why would the oil companies monitor the environmental impact in the waters of UK and Denmark :-D
Fairly soon it will be time for me to publish this year's set of data from them, I plan to look at this issue at the same time. I guess it's easiest to map "inf" to NULL. I think the country issue isn't something we should tackle...
I had a meeting with OBIS after the previous GBIF Community webinar -- and will attend a meeting with OBIS and Colombia organized by the secretariat soon. The topic of "oceans" as more relevant than "countries" is sure to be relevant.
Recall that also Kjell Bjørklund was much more interested in "oceans" than "countries" for the Radiolaria dataset.
Republished with NULL instead of inf
From the GBIF CESP feedback to the OpenPSD final report: