Notes From Nature Talk

Feature - let us learn from mistakes

  • HelenBennett57 by HelenBennett57

    Hi,

    Feature request.

    As a data enterer, I would like to see how my entries have (dis)agreed with other users' entries, so that I can see which have been "voted in" and "voted out", and start transcribing ambiguous stuff in a more standardised way and make my work more valuable.

    This would be particularly useful for location/description, as disentangling the content for the two fields can be a judgement call.

    Happy to spec this out further on request.

    Helen

    Posted

  • reddder by reddder

    That info would be very useful in increasing the group's efficiency/accuracy.

    Posted

  • j-walk by j-walk

    I agree.

    Posted

  • HelenBennett57 by HelenBennett57

    I had a further and much simpler idea on this one - if a record already has discussion, then flag it up in the Transcribe page. That way, if there had already been questions like "is x habitat or location?", we could see the consensus. We could see from the Transcribe page that there is something to be seen.

    Posted

  • Austinmast by Austinmast

    This is a great idea. I'm going to bring it to the steering committee's attention. Thanks!

    Posted

  • HelenBennett57 by HelenBennett57 in response to Austinmast's comment.

    Thank you!

    Posted

  • riskingraisin by riskingraisin

    I agree that a flag on the specimen indicating that it has been commented on would be a great addition.

    Posted

  • Mr._Kevvy by Mr._Kevvy

    Since the interface is still in development, adding another comment so that this thread gets bumped to the top so that this feature can, we hope, be added. Anything to let the next transcribers know when there is commentary on the existing specimen would be very productive, ie when the previous transcriber(s) have found non-obvious mistakes or supplied missing info via web research, etc.

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    oh, that is a fabulous idea! We have some hopes for a pending proposal for funding that would move towards a much more "transcribe-validate" paradigm that would allow just the kind of thinking, above @Mr. Kevvy

    Posted

  • DZM by DZM admin

    If we get to rebuild/improve the FF interface, I've learned a few best practices/user suggestions from my first three months here that might also be really helpful to integrate.

    Definitely keep us all posted on how that proposal goes! 😃

    Posted

  • HelenBennett57 by HelenBennett57

    Please! Though right now my top usability thing would just be, restore the ability to use Enter to save the entire date - now and then I still forget and the year probably doesn't get saved.

    Posted

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Some suggestions for interface: 1) date fields are so dim I can't check my entry. 2) text fields esp. Other Notes need to be much wider so I can check my whole entry 3) standardize format for entries like mi. / mi or J. A. Linsley / JA Linsley or N.W. / NW also what to put when a letter is hidden behind the pin or illegible -- perhaps ?

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    These are really good suggestions @Shiphrah and @HelenBennett57. I have some ideas how to standardize some of these "free-form" fields such as collector and locality (e.g. for cardinalities) that could be interesting to implement. Right now, we are on life support for NFN as opposed to having the capacity to make changes like this. Really hoping this does change soon.

    Posted

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Thanks for the feedback, Robgur!

    Posted

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Other ideas now it seems someone is paying attention: a proofread option that would desplay all fields in a record and allow going back to make corrections. Also, DON'T allow going back to make changes after seeing what others have entered, to prevent a temptation to copycat. Also, offer a place onsite for odd characters like the degree symbol; the suggestion someone made to paste in from Word doesn't work for us iPad users.
    thanks for listening!

    Posted

  • HelenBennett57 by HelenBennett57 in response to Shiphrah's comment.

    Hi @Shiphrah, did you see these two threads?

    Some useful tools, including various symbols to copy and paste: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/boards/BNN0000001/discussions/DNN00001vl

    Transcription standards - if you find answers to 'how should this be done?' questions for Calbug, that would be a good place for them. http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/boards/BNN0000001/discussions/DNN000024q

    Re. a proofreading option in Calbug, there's a little grey box on the screen next to the orange 'next record' button, showing the numbers e.g. 1/9 (your current field, out of the total fields for the record). If you click it, you can see what you've got for all the fields in the record. You can click on one of those fields to go back and edit it.

    Posted

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Thanks very much!

    Posted

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Big #problem: I'm working on an iPad (reclining is easier on my bad back) and I've found generally when I want to check data in another Safari tab (e.g. Wikipedia) or consult something from the help board, when I try to go back to the bug I was working on I find myself bounced back to the entry page and can't get back to that particular bug! So I just do as well as I can without checking, and have started leaving more notes and hash tags on the bug. Don't know if IOS is the only platform with this problem.

    Posted

  • DZM by DZM admin

    You mean that when you look at another tab, and then go back to the tab you were working on before, the first tab randomly bounces you to... what, to the front page? That's odd and shouldn't happen.

    Have you tried it on a computer? Does it happen there, too?

    Thanks!!

    Posted