Closed peterdesmet closed 5 years ago
Awesome! Thanks Matt. Could you trigger a reprocessing for https://www.gbif.org/dataset/0a2eaf0c-5504-4f48-a47f-c94229029dc8?
Hi Peter, it's not yet deployed (and one hour before home-time before a public holiday in Denmark is not when we do deployments). Check back next week :)
No problem. Will the checklist be reprocessed automatically or does it need to be triggered?
Since the verbatim data hasn't changed, I'll need to manually reprocess anything with one of the affected values.
Hi Matt, checking back. 😄 Can you reprocess this dataset?
I just initiated a crawl (note that this is a checklist though, and I think the deployment was only the occurrence pipeline)
I have released a new version of checklistbank with the changed parsers, but I haven't deployed it yet
Thanks! Seems resolved for the dataset in question.
http://marineregions.org/mrgid/26567
eventDate: 2000
and occurrenceStatus: reported
)http://marineregions.org/mrgid/26567
occurrenceStatus: PRESENT
=> Mapping works
Referencing these distributions would be easier if they had an id. 😄
I noticed that the occurrenceStatus parser interprets
reported
asEXCLUDED
. I think that should bePRESENT
, becausereported
doesn't mean erroneous. The definition forexcluded
is:Proposed action:
reported
toPRESENT
reported in error
and map toEXCLUDED
. That way, all 3 alternatives for EXCLUDED listed at http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/occurrence_status.xml are indeed mapped.This updated mapping is imported for unified checklist of alien species in Belgium: https://github.com/trias-project/unified-checklist/issues/37#issuecomment-493006247