Discussion to formalize `project`, `observer` and `verifier` fields for localizations

[hohonuuli]

The vars-localize and vars-gridview tools add additional information to an association's link_value json used to define the bounding box. These fields are:

• observer - Who drew the boundingbox (using vars-localize)
• verifier - Who confirmed the id of the bounding box (using vars-gridview)
• project - info about what project the localizations were created for. e.g. FathomNet

When I merged the ML generated localizations into MBARI's main VARS database, I dropped these fields. So this issue is to track a discussion on how best to formalize the tracking of the data in these fields. I'd prefer to remove them from the JSON as it creates a lot of noise, but that might not be the best course of action. This should be a discussion with @kevinsbarnard and MBARI's video lab.

[hohonuuli]

Project

My proposal is to drop the use of project completely. There's a column, observations.observation_group that should be used to track this. Currently, the way it's used is that primary annotations, those created by the video lab, are assigned to a group like ROV or i2MAP that groups them by platform type.

The ML annotations were imported into a group named ROV:training-set. These annotations might be redundant, essentially double counting observations. By putting them into a special group, they can be excluded from queries for quantitiative/qualitative data. Note that the other common group for ML annotations would be i2MAP:training-set.

[hohonuuli]

We met with the video lab today and discussed this. The current thinking is to keep an observer and verifier field in the associations's link_value JSON.