Project

General

Profile

Actions

bug #8365

closed

DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbers

Added by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Highest
Category:
cdmlib
Target version:
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:
Severity:
normal
Found in Version:
Tags:

Description

Users frequently enter the collection code with the accession number which can cause to code to appear duplicated in the portal and elsewhere.

To avoid this duplicate appearance the code should be stripped from the accession number in the DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy


Files

picture686-1.png (33.7 KB) picture686-1.png Andreas Kohlbecker, 07/12/2019 11:59 AM
picture406-1.png (27 KB) picture406-1.png Wolf-Henning Kusber, 07/16/2019 06:18 PM
picture171-1.png (67.4 KB) picture171-1.png Andreas Kohlbecker, 07/17/2019 09:02 AM
picture171-2.png (65.9 KB) picture171-2.png Andreas Kohlbecker, 07/17/2019 09:02 AM

Related issues

Copied from PhycoBank - task #8361: release portal vs. test portalResolvedWolf-Henning Kusber

Actions
Actions #1

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Resolved
  • Assignee changed from Andreas Kohlbecker to Andreas Müller
  • % Done changed from 0 to 50

We should also consider removing the parentheses from the accession number since this seems to be useless in most sitations.

Actions #2

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Copied from task #8361: release portal vs. test portal added
Actions #3

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Copied from deleted (task #8361: release portal vs. test portal)
Actions #4

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Parent task set to #8361
Actions #5

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Parent task deleted (#8361)
Actions #6

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Copied from task #8361: release portal vs. test portal added
Actions #7

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

I removed the parentheses but these now causes inconsistent display:

What do you think Henning?

Actions #8

Updated by Wolf-Henning Kusber over 3 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Wolf-Henning Kusber to Andreas Kohlbecker

Reviewing the screen shot:
First representation: Lectotype (reference) gathering(Code accession number)
Second representation: Registration Name Type: gathering. Lectotype, Code accession number

I cannot see a problematic inconsitency because both are different representations with overlapping information. Both make sense, both are justified.

I would leave this as is (because it's fine).

Actions #9

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
  • Assignee changed from Andreas Kohlbecker to Wolf-Henning Kusber

OK, parentheses are removed again.

Actions #10

Updated by Wolf-Henning Kusber over 3 years ago

Quote

"OK, parentheses are removed again."

The brackets are reinstated not removed but should be removed, see Screen shot:

Actions #11

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

removing the parentheses would affect all portals. Before doing this we should keep the effect on other portals in mind and discuss this step with other users.

For example the Cichorieae synonym portal page for Youngia atripappa looks now like:

this would be changed to

The visual separation of the accession numbers from the preceding text is no less good without the parentheses.

Actions #12

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Feedback
  • Assignee changed from Andreas Kohlbecker to Wolf-Henning Kusber
Actions #13

Updated by Wolf-Henning Kusber over 3 years ago

  • File picture714-1.png added
  • File picture714-2.png added

In the Youngia example the version with brackets is clearer.

Actions #14

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • File deleted (picture714-1.png)
Actions #15

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • File deleted (picture714-2.png)
Actions #16

Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Closed
  • % Done changed from 80 to 100

ok, so i am closing this issue now

Actions #17

Updated by Andreas Müller over 3 years ago

Andreas Kohlbecker wrote:

Users frequently enter the collection code with the accession number which can cause to code to appear duplicated in the portal and elsewhere.

This is not fully correct I think. The problem is that the collection code is sometimes part of the accession number (e.g. "B") which causes these problems.

Actions #18

Updated by Andreas Müller over 3 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Wolf-Henning Kusber to Andreas Kohlbecker

To me there seems to be a misunderstanding. My understanding of #8365#note-8 is that is fine to have brackets for typification but NOT to have them for registration formatting. Only removing them for registration would not brake with any other portals.
So to me this seems to be the wanted behavior. But I don't know if this is possible or if both formattings work with the same formatter.

Just in case there is still any open question here.

Actions #19

Updated by Andreas Müller over 3 years ago

One last question: is the original task of the ticket to deduplicate collection code if necessary now implemented in the cacheStrategy itself? This might be interesting to know as I think deduplication has also be done elsewhere in Portal and/or TaxEditor (by PP). Might be interesting to check if this is still needed then. Add PP and KL in cc for this.

Actions #20

Updated by Andreas Müller over 3 years ago

Andreas Müller wrote:

To me there seems to be a misunderstanding. My understanding of #8365#note-8 is that is fine to have brackets for typification but NOT to have them for registration formatting. Only removing them for registration would not brake with any other portals.
So to me this seems to be the wanted behavior. But I don't know if this is possible or if both formattings work with the same formatter.

Just in case there is still any open question here.

I just see that on the name page it has been implemented correctly already. This was just reported in the ticket therefor my above comment.

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF