DV-162 ⁃ Add ability to enter notes about specific surveys/databases

[sync-by-unito[bot]]

Add ability for people to add notes about a database (aka survey). These will be defining/inherent characteristics about a survey, such as duplicate images in the database due to processing error, severe flooding that impacted the soundness of data collection, etc. These characteristics would likely impact analyses later on, so therefore are important to attach to the database, as a sort of metadata/comments/notes per database.

These notes need to be easily accessible to users, and readily edited and/or at least added to, with a clear indication of who added the comment and when it was added. In many situations these notes will only be added during the data journey within IDS (in other words, after processing in Process Images module).

These notes will be stored as a separate table in Redshift, per SurveyID (database). Note quite sure if this feature can be available for local databases.

┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task by Unito

[sync-by-unito[bot]]

➤ Shannon Dubay commented:

Data Science ( https://pantheradatascience.atlassian.net/jira/people/team/61a6dbc3-8e98-4200-ab42-bd46246ce00b?ref=jira$&src=issue ) (Shannon Dubay Christopher Marais Lauren Foden Michael Ross Ross Tyzack Pitman Valentine TawiraIsaiah Lekay Phoebe M ) What we were discussing today in the meeting about notes for databases/surveys. Feel free to add any points/information to the task, should you want to!

[sync-by-unito[bot]]

➤ Shannon Dubay commented:

Note to self: See email convo with Beckie about this topic around Sept. Email Subject: Lapalala 2020: duplicate leopard images. Way forward?

[sync-by-unito[bot]]

➤ Shannon Dubay commented:

Another example of how this would be helpful:

Marine and Robin have 2 databases from W that according to Marine are “not representative of the wildlife present in the park“ because “the cameras were so badly deployed”, i.e. “micro-placement was not appropriate, with

1. the best animal trail was not always selected, some cameras were set inside riverbeds rather than on the side of the riverbed, overlooking it and the trail along its side, etc.
2. the cameras were often set too low or facing upwards/downwards, resulting in pictures of hooves/paws or only part of the animals' heads. 
3. The vegetation was not sufficiently cleared in front of the cameras.”

We would still like to keep these images, but it will be important for future for us to know that it may not be sound to compare these datasets to others in the area, for example. It would be helpful to have a way to note this at the survey-level (not the record-level).

Note to self: brought up in email convo with Marine and Robin about Data Uploads in April/May. Email Subject: RE : RE : RE : RE : Data Uploads