Open ManonGros opened 2 months ago
I suggest further discussions should distinguish contacts associated with collections and institutions from those within the scope of the aforementioned "staff registry." My intention in raising this is to make inactive, invalid, retired contacts visible for complementing benefits rather than supply missing information or maintain a holistic contact system.
I am logging the idea to possibly be discussed at a later GRSciColl community webinar.
The original comment was:
Note that GRSciColl used to have a staff registry but we decided to keep only collection and institution contacts instead. The rationale is explained here: https://github.com/gbif/registry/issues/379 https://github.com/gbif/registry/issues/485 https://github.com/gbif/registry/issues/473
There are some advantages of keeping track of historical contacts:
Note that with the work on collection descriptors, people will be able to share collector's names and names of people who identify the specimens. Perhaps linking GRSciColl to Bionomia would be an alternative to keep historical contacts (https://github.com/gbif/registry/issues/499).
Some additional notes: