feature request #8137
openImplement sources for type designations in data portal
0%
Description
For details see #8017.
Be aware that there are 2 different types of sources "lectotype"(hasDesignationSource) sources and general sources. "Lectotype" source is a single source which should only be available for type designations with a status returning true on hasDesignationSource().
Type information is available on taxon pages and soon also on taxon name pages. We probably need the sources for both (needs discussion if sources should also be shown on the taxon page as this is more compact, maybe configurability needed).
Also specimen pages or tables might be places where type designation information is shown and therefore those should be adapted.
For implementations details (e.g. ordering see also #7653#note-5
Related issues
Updated by Andreas Müller about 5 years ago
- Related to feature request #8136: Implement sources for type designations in TaxEditor added
Updated by Andreas Müller about 5 years ago
- Blocked by feature request #8017: TypeDesignations need sources additional to lectotypifcation sources added
Updated by Andreas Müller about 5 years ago
- Related to feature request #7653: [DISCUSS] Delete NameFacts => Result: no added
Updated by Andreas Müller about 5 years ago
- Related to feature request #8134: Implement verbatim type information in dataportal added
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker almost 5 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.6 to Release 5.7
Updated by Andreas Müller almost 5 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.7 to Release 5.8
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.8 to Release 5.10
Updated by Andreas Müller over 4 years ago
- Related to feature request #6718: Constistent TypeDesignation representation creation added
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.10 to Release 5.11
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 4 years ago
- Priority changed from New to Highest
Updated by Andreas Müller over 4 years ago
WGB:
es ist richtig, dass es hier zwei Fälle gibt: Solche, die die Quelle des Records angeben (woher kommt die Information). Der zweite Fall bezieht sich auf die effektive Publikation von „nomenclatural acts“ einer Type Designation. Das betrifft Lektotypisierungen, aber auch Neo- und Epitypisierungen, meine ich (Wolf-Henning – habe ich noch was vergessen?).
===
AM:
ich denke fürs Portal ist die Zuordnung der Typuskategorien zum möglichen Vorhandensein einer „nomenclatural act reference“ zweitrangig, sie sollte angezeigt werden wenn vorhanden. Im Editor hingegen sollte (und wird bereits) verindert werden, dass diese falsch angelegt werden können.
Allerdings sind einige Kategorien da evtl. noch nicht richtig gehandelt.
In einer älteren Mail (vom 20.6.) schrieb Walter:
„das gilt nicht für Para- und Iso- -lekto, -neotypen oder -epitypen! Da gibt’s wie immer eine Quelle (die gleich der Designation Reference sein kann, aber nicht sein muss).“
Da wollte ich immer schon mal nachhaken: das heißt Paralectotype, Isolectotype, etc. dürfen diese NICHT haben, sondern exakt nur Lectotype, Neotype und Epitype?
Dann müssten wir unseren Code in cdmlib anpassen, der entscheidet derzeit nämlich noch folgendermaßen:
public boolean isLectotype(){
if (this.equals(LECTOTYPE()) ||
this.equals(ISOLECTOTYPE()) ||
this.equals(SECOND_STEP_LECTOTYPE()) ||
this.equals(PARALECTOTYPE()) ||
//with source but not "lecto"
this.equals(EPITYPE()) ||
this.equals(ISOEPITYPE()) ||
this.equals(NEOTYPE()) ||
this.equals(ISONEOTYPE()) ||
this.equals(SECOND_STEP_NEOTYPE())
){
return true;
}else{
return false;
}
}
Isolectoype, Second Step Lectotype, Paralectotype, Isoepytype, Isoneotype und Second Step Neotype würden dann also rausfallen?
Updated by Andreas Müller over 4 years ago
Note: isLectopye() was renamed to hasDesignationSource()
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.11 to Release 5.12
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker about 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.12 to Release 5.13
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker about 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.13 to Release 5.14
Updated by Andreas Müller almost 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.14 to Release 5.15
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.15 to Release 5.18
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.18 to Release 5.19
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker about 3 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.19 to Release 5.21
Updated by Andreas Müller about 3 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.21 to Release 5.22
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker almost 3 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.22 to Release 5.25
Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 2 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.25 to Release 5.45
Updated by Katja Luther over 1 year ago
- Assignee changed from Andreas Kohlbecker to Katja Luther
Updated by Andreas Müller 6 days ago
- Status changed from New to Feedback
- Target version changed from Release 5.45 to Release 5.43
Can you please check if this is maybe already implemented. If not, is it still open on webservice side or only on portal side?