https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/redmine/favicon.ico?14691914852019-07-11T16:04:11ZEDIT Project ManagementEDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473122019-07-11T16:04:11ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i> to <i>Andreas Müller</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>50</i></li></ul><p>We should also consider removing the parentheses from the accession number since this seems to be useless in most sitations.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473152019-07-11T16:05:20ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Copied from</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-6 status-3 priority-10 priority-lowest" href="/redmine/issues/8361">task #8361</a>: release portal vs. test portal</i> added</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473172019-07-11T16:05:35ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Copied from</strong> deleted (<i><a class="issue tracker-6 status-3 priority-10 priority-lowest" href="/redmine/issues/8361">task #8361</a>: release portal vs. test portal</i>)</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473182019-07-11T16:05:47ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Parent task</strong> set to <i>#8361</i></li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473192019-07-11T16:06:05ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Parent task</strong> deleted (<del><i>#8361</i></del>)</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473212019-07-11T16:06:29ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Copied from</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-6 status-3 priority-10 priority-lowest" href="/redmine/issues/8361">task #8361</a>: release portal vs. test portal</i> added</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473242019-07-12T09:59:55ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/redmine/attachments/1635">picture686-1.png</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/redmine/attachments/download/1635/picture686-1.png">picture686-1.png</a> added</li><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Resolved</i> to <i>Feedback</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Andreas Müller</i> to <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i></li></ul><p>I removed the parentheses but these now causes inconsistent display:</p>
<p><img src="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/attachments/download/1635/picture686-1.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>What do you think Henning?</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473352019-07-12T17:15:04ZWolf-Henning Kusber
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i> to <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i></li></ul><p>Reviewing the screen shot:<br>
First representation: Lectotype (reference) gathering(Code accession number)<br>
Second representation: Registration Name Type: gathering. Lectotype, Code accession number</p>
<p>I cannot see a problematic inconsitency because both are different representations with overlapping information. Both make sense, both are justified.</p>
<p>I would leave this as is (because it's fine).</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=473772019-07-16T10:08:09ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Feedback</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i> to <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i></li></ul><p>OK, parentheses are removed again.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=474432019-07-16T16:18:10ZWolf-Henning Kusber
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/redmine/attachments/1643">picture406-1.png</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/redmine/attachments/download/1643/picture406-1.png">picture406-1.png</a> added</li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i> to <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>50</i> to <i>80</i></li></ul><p>Quote</p>
<p>"OK, parentheses are removed again."</p>
<p>The brackets are reinstated not removed but should be removed, see Screen shot:</p>
<p><img src="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/attachments/download/1643/picture406-1.png" alt="" /></p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=474682019-07-17T07:02:06ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/redmine/attachments/1646">picture171-1.png</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/redmine/attachments/download/1646/picture171-1.png">picture171-1.png</a> added</li><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/redmine/attachments/1647">picture171-2.png</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/redmine/attachments/download/1647/picture171-2.png">picture171-2.png</a> added</li></ul><p>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.</p>
<p>For example the Cichorieae synonym portal page for Youngia atripappa looks now like:</p>
<p><img src="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/attachments/download/1646/picture171-1.png" alt="" /> </p>
<p>this would be changed to </p>
<p><img src="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/attachments/download/1647/picture171-2.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>The visual separation of the accession numbers from the preceding text is no less good without the parentheses.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=474692019-07-17T07:02:48ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Resolved</i> to <i>Feedback</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i> to <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i></li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=474932019-07-17T15:22:57ZWolf-Henning Kusber
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <i>picture714-1.png</i> added</li><li><strong>File</strong> <i>picture714-2.png</i> added</li></ul><p>In the Youngia example the version with brackets is clearer.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=475062019-07-17T16:55:26ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> deleted (<del><i>picture714-1.png</i></del>)</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=475072019-07-17T16:55:32ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> deleted (<del><i>picture714-2.png</i></del>)</li></ul> EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=475082019-07-17T16:56:02ZAndreas Kohlbecker
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Feedback</i> to <i>Closed</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>80</i> to <i>100</i></li></ul><p>ok, so i am closing this issue now</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=479292019-07-26T11:58:46ZAndreas Müller
<ul></ul><p>Andreas Kohlbecker wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Users frequently enter the collection code with the accession number which can cause to code to appear duplicated in the portal and elsewhere.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>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.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=479302019-07-26T12:13:55ZAndreas Müller
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Wolf-Henning Kusber</i> to <i>Andreas Kohlbecker</i></li></ul><p>To me there seems to be a misunderstanding. My understanding of <a class="issue tracker-4 status-5 priority-10 priority-lowest closed" title="bug: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbers (Closed)" href="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365#note-8">#8365#note-8</a> 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.<br>
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.</p>
<p>Just in case there is still any open question here.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=479312019-07-26T12:19:53ZAndreas Müller
<ul></ul><p>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.</p>
EDIT - bug #8365: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbershttps://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365?journal_id=479322019-07-26T12:38:18ZAndreas Müller
<ul></ul><p>Andreas Müller wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To me there seems to be a misunderstanding. My understanding of <a class="issue tracker-4 status-5 priority-10 priority-lowest closed" title="bug: DerivedUnitFacadeCacheStrategy should remove collection codes from accession numbers (Closed)" href="https://dev.e-taxonomy.eu/redmine/issues/8365#note-8">#8365#note-8</a> 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.<br>
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.</p>
<p>Just in case there is still any open question here.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>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.</p>