open-data-rescue / climate-data-rescue

Climate Data Rescue is an archival data rescue platform using Ruby on Rails.
https://citsci.geog.mcgill.ca
MIT License
15 stars 9 forks source link

Vapour Pressure 118/117 #374

Closed raakal closed 1 year ago

raakal commented 3 years ago

On some pages when users attempt to add the numeric value for Vapour Pressure, and it is 118/117, it changes the number to 'illegible'.

Users are currently leaving these values 'empty' and making a Transcriber comment to highlight the issue as occurring alongside filling out the Google Issues Form.

Some examples:

https://citsci.geog.mcgill.ca/en/transcriptions/2692/edit https://citsci.geog.mcgill.ca/en/transcriptions/2620/edit (4th 7:48pm, 10:48pm) https://citsci.geog.mcgill.ca/en/transcriptions/2609 (29th 10:48pm)

VickyS08 commented 1 year ago

We think this is because the field ID is 118, and similarly for other similar field with ID 117, etc. When users enter 117 ,118 and similar values, there is a conflict and the value defaults to "illegible"

Additional comments: https://draw.geog.mcgill.ca//en/transcriptions/2692/edit: issue occurs when trying to edit Pressure of Vapour values on the 12th at 7:48pm, 10:48pm, and 11:13pm. When I edit the current value, which is Empty/Blank, and enter 117 instead, it defaults back to Empty/Blank. If I try to enter 118, instead, it will accept that value. https://draw.geog.mcgill.ca//en/transcriptions/2620/edit: issue occurs when trying to edit Pressure of Vapour values on the 4th at 7:48pm and 10:48pm. When I edit the current value, which is Illegible, and enter 118 instead, it defaults back to Illegible. If I try to enter 117, instead, it will accept that value. https://draw.geog.mcgill.ca//en/transcriptions/2609/edit: Rachel flagged this transcription as an example, but it allowed me to edit the Pressure of Vapour value on the 29th at 10:48pm from Empty/Blank to 117, which is the correct value. Takeaway: this issue persists in some transcriptions, but not in others previously flagged as exhibiting the issue. I thought that the issue may be related to the register type, but all three examples are Register 110, page 1. Maybe the issue is connected to the field?

VickyS08 commented 1 year ago

Tested and values appear as 117, 118 and 119 on the test site on 2023-02-28