bug #9510
openImprove label for descriptions created via DDS matrix
0%
Description
The automatically created label for a new "literature" description is something like {name of DDS}: Factual data set for {Taxon name}
"Factual data set" is not fully correct. It could be something like "...: Literature data for {Taxon name}"
Also from the matrix perspective it does not make so much sense to put the DDS name in front as all record visible there belong to this dataset. But from the factual data view perspective it may make sense so I have no better idea.
The same issue exists for taxon descriptions holding individual associations created via the matrix. They also use "Factual data set for {Taxon name}" which is too unspecific.
Maybe we could use something like "Specimen used by {name of DDS} for {taxon name}? => DONE
Also we need to think about the existing description relabeling during taxon operations (e.g. syn<->acc swap leads to a new label which has nothing to do with the old label anymore). The new label formatter is defined in the swap function in TaxonService (should be moved to model.format anyway).
Related issues
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
The above suggestion are only meant as first ideas. Please feel free to suggest/find better labels.
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
- Related to bug #9488: Show details of description in character matrix added
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
- Related to feature request #9511: Move specimens/individual associations for matrix into same description added
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
Auch das Label der Specimen description selber entspricht noch nicht ganz dem, wie wir es mal besprochen haben:
===
Aus alter Mail (2019-11-20):
AM:
Mein Vorschlag wäre „Descriptive Data {Dataset Name} for {Taxon Name}“ oder andersherum. Allerdings wird das natürlich ein bisschen lang. Gleichzeitig sind aber die Bezüge zum Taxon, Dataset und dass es sich um Descriptive Data handelt recht essentiell um in jedem Kontext zu verstehen, worum es sich handelt.
AK:
Finde ich sehr gut!
NK:
ich auch
===
Derzeit scheint es eher sowas wie {Dataset name}: Specimen description for {Specimen titleCache} zu sein.
Oder haben wir uns da nach der Mail nochmal umentschieden.
Ich finde die Variante aus der Mail besser.
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
... ich sehe gerade, dass die obige Labeldiskussion v.a. fürs Portal gedacht war, dennoch vielleicht auch passend für das Label der Description selber.
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
- Related to feature request #8967: Improve label for cloned descriptions added
Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
- Related to bug #9512: Descriptions being created for individual associations in matrix should have description status "Individual association" added
Updated by Katja Luther over 2 years ago
- Target version changed from Release 5.22 to Release 5.44
Updated by Katja Luther about 2 years ago
- Tags changed from additivity to additivity, matrix
Updated by Andreas Müller about 2 years ago
- Description updated (diff)
- Status changed from New to In Progress