Suggestions for FAQ

by Shiphrah

i'm opening this discussion so that volunteers can suggest items for the FAQ which has been proposed. This is NOT a place for suggestions for the interface, but rather suggestions for information that would make the current interface easier to use. I hope it can be useful. @Mr Kevvy @DZM @Robgur

Posted February 10, 2015 3:10 AM
by Shiphrah

As recent volunteer in Calbug, I have lots of ideas. Here are a few:

Organize FAQ by Field Name, which would make finding needed info faster.

Offer models of standardized formats for things like collector names, which show up in the data several ways. e.g. J Doe, MM Roe, KJ & LM Smith (no periods or spaces in initials, comma between one name & the next, use & for two people with same last name)

Advise what to do when tags add subspecies or show a taxonomic name different from the one already in the record.

Posted February 10, 2015 3:23 AM
by HelenBennett57

For the Herbarium, the advice is to transcribe collector names exactly as written - even when you are certain that they are the same people. In fact, everything except double-checked spelling mistakes should be transcribed exactly as written. This increases the chances of getting a consensus transcription, which can then be easily standardised by computer later.

Posted February 10, 2015 3:25 PM
by DZM admin

I suggest that as everyone here is putting this together, write out drafts for the FAQ by question and answer, as it's organized over at Higgs Hunters:

Q: What are we classifying?
A: We are classifying lines that seem to
sprout from a common point that is NOT the center. These are called
"Off-center vertexes" (OCVs). Ideally, the lines should not extend
over that common point, but practically, we see that the computer
often makes it look like they do (so-called "backwards" lines). Use
your own judgement in this as much as you can, and use the discussion
button to get a look at the zoomed-in and side view to verify your
guesses when you are starting out. You'll get the hang of it after a
few examples!

If everyone writes drafts of what they think the most common questions are, we'll have a good collection of questions and answers very quickly!

Posted February 10, 2015 6:36 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

Any FAQ is going to have to include the FAQs and Useful Tools from the NFN blog, as well as much culled from the ongoing Transcription Standards thread. I have a bunch more questions that I've never bothered asking as well, as we never got "official" confirmation or answers from the last bunch.

Sorry I'm late to the party... I just spent four days cleaning the dictionary of rejected ie misspelled ITIS records that had snuck into the original export. I'm hoping this whole "automation" business may catch on as one of the standardization tools, given the twelve million Herbaria records and all. 😉

Posted February 11, 2015 3:21 AM
by HelenBennett57

When the latest determination uses an abbreviation for the genus name, because the genus is the same as the previous/original determination, should we expand the genus name so that it makes sense when it's on its own, or transcribe as-is? Examples: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003mbn , http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003jz1

Should powerlines go in the location (because it helps you find a place), or habitat (because they imply a more open space and different microclimate)? Example: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003qbt

What do you enter when a record has two different counties? Example: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN000412e

What do you enter when a record has two different dates?

On this record, would you rather have the scientific name as 'unidentified' or as the supposition? http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003ynx

Posted February 11, 2015 2:00 PM
by DZM admin in response to HelenBennett57's comment.

@HelenBennett57 ... are these questions that you're asking because you don't have answers to them yet? Or do you know the answers?

If you need the answers, perhaps scientist @robgur can provide the answers. (I certainly can't!)

Also, do you think some of these (for instance, the last one) might be a bit too specific to be in a "frequently" asked questions document? Some of them definitely do belong!

And, yes, Kevvy, that document would be a fantastic place to start! That whole thing should probably be incorporated in. Perhaps we should frame this discussion around "what common questions are not already answered in that blog post?"

Posted February 11, 2015 4:34 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

Here are the questions I'd not posted yet in the Standards thread:
1. If "s.n." (sine numerum = no number) is listed as the Collector Number, is it better to leave the field empty or actually put "s.n." in it?
2. Should "floodplain" be in Habitat? I'm inclined to put it there as it describes a growing condition as floodplains are fertilized when flooded, other plants drowned, etc.
3. What is the convention for transcribing a date range as opposed to one specific day? (ie first, last or midway through the range)
4. If a specimen is cultivated at one location from cuttings/seeds/rhizomes collected at a second location, which should be the transcribed country/state/county/location, the first or second?
Posted February 12, 2015 12:15 AM
by DZM admin

Again, Mr. Kevvy, are these questions that you personally want answered, and don't currently know the answer to?

It seems to me that many of these so far are "things that I want an answer to" more than "things that I think everyone else should know..." ?

It would definitely be good to get official science-team answers to all these questions (and, if you like, I can try to hail a scientist to get those answers), but would they be common-enough questions that they should be in an FAQ? If so, that's fine; just asking! 😃

Posted February 12, 2015 4:03 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

All of those questions are transcription standards which are ambiguous and currently unanswered (which means they will affect concurrence if everyone transcribes these examples differently) so it's not just for me...

Posted February 12, 2015 4:30 PM
by DZM admin

Alright. So these are all things that the scientists need to answer.

I'll try to get a scientist over here to this thread to answer Helen's five questions and Kevvy's four.

Posted February 13, 2015 3:48 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

Thanks. :^) And just so it's all in one place, here are the questions I posted in the Transcription Standards thread that I indicated:
1. Although we transcribe only the latest determination if there are multiple, should we also transcribe multiple synonyms in the same
  determination if they are listed, or just the first? (ie "Cyperus
  echinatus [=C. ovularis]")
2. Should we also transcribe multiple collector numbers as written? ie "123 & 4567" (Probably an obvious "yes" but isn't formally in the
  Standards.)
3. Are the transcriptions case sensitive, or is it OK to correct or improve capitalization without notifying? (ie the screaming caps of
  the PROVINCES). I note that it is already approved to correct
  capitalization in the genus/species scientific name, and by
  splitting/joining sentences due to separation of location from habitat
  will necessitate changing case. Disregard this one... already
  answered
  here
  and fortunately it's a "yes"!
4. Should we transcribe location information that is printed into the template of the label rather than being added? (such as "Plants of the
  Great Dismal Swamp" or "Flora of Fort..." etc.)
5. Should we transcribe "Collected as part of a survey..." and other info that doesn't relate to this specimen per se?
6. Should we transcribe "sheet # of #" or other information indicating that this specimen is part of a set, but again is not just about this
  one per se?
7. Should we transcribe re-examination? ie "This specimen was examined as part of a study of..." that occurs years after the original label.
8. Should we transcribe personal comments that clearly have nothing to do with the specimen? (Thinking Philip E. Hyatt here for some reason.
  😄 )
9. If a word is hyphenated across two lines, do we remove the hyphen and join it? (Not including hyphenated word pairs of course. This is
  probably also an obvious "yes" but should be in the Standards
  formally.)
10. Should we transcribe Habitat/Description (or other specimen-relevant) info in later, separate determinations? (sometimes
  the person who made it adds a comment with further info about the
  specimen, ie its condition or maturity.)
Plus Helen's unofficial-but-probably-correct reponses:
My tuppence-worth:
1. I haven't been; just been giving the 'main' name.
2. Agree
3. Agree
4. I haven't been doing this unless without it you couldn't tell the location (despite temptation - "Great Dismal Swamp" is just wonderful)
- I think AustinMast said a long time back in an object comment, just to transcribe the bits that relate to the data entry fields.
1. Again, haven't been transcribing 😦 would like to though.
2. "Sheet x of y" - transcribe and also flag in the comments.
3. Re-examination: haven't transcribed.
4. Philip E. Hyatt should have his own database fields 😃 His comments were fun at first but now they're just getting a bit tedious.
  Or maybe all these things need an 'other random stuff' field?
5. Agree, de-hyphenate.
Posted February 13, 2015 4:49 PM
by DZM admin

I think your numbers got a little bit off on that last comment! I got confused for a bit. ^_^

Posted February 13, 2015 5:40 PM
by Mr._Kevvy in response to DZM's comment.

Sorry about that... it was proper and then the forum went and renumbered it all when it was saved based on the indentation. :p Fixed it.

Posted February 13, 2015 5:56 PM
by robgur scientist, admin

THANKS to @HelenBennett57 and Mr. Kevvy for getting these together and sorry for not getting back to you sooner on the excellent compilation. It'll take just a little bit of time to answers back to you --- I am guessing in the next couple days. Is it ok if we assemble that as a FAQ posted on the blog (and hopefully the website?)

Posted February 14, 2015 4:19 AM
by Mr._Kevvy in response to robgur's comment.

"sorry for not getting back to you sooner on the excellent compilation"

Please don't be... the feedback and the people on this project are excellent. :^)

Posted February 14, 2015 6:18 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

One to add... I'd suggest a wording change on the existing FAQ:

"you can flag the record by commenting on it (e.g. with the hashtag # error) and indicate what is in error."

Makes it appear that "error" is the only hashtag that is to be used, whereas there are plenty of others ie unclear, handwriting, etc. that may be more appropriate.

Posted February 15, 2015 12:15 AM
by DZM admin

If you all agree, we could have the team update that other blog post with the answers that we get from this thread, instead of creating a new one here on Talk. No matter what, it'd be nice to have all of the questions and answers in the same place!!

Either way, we could add a prominent link to it from the classification interface to cut down on people's fear that they're doing something wrong.

I'll bug the team again if we don't get some answers by the end of the week. 😃 Thank you all!

Posted February 16, 2015 2:51 PM
by md68135 scientist

Hi Everyone,

I would like to start off by thanking you all for your tremendous efforts! We appreciate it so very much.

I have attempted to answer all the questions from this post. @robgur and I would like to get your feedback and comments about our answers. Based on this and any further suggestions we will integrate part of this into an updated FAQ.

@Mr. Kevvy and @HelenBennett57 please let us know what you think.

Thanks again!

You should be able to comment on the document linked below.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cqv1OywyxQPmxVfnPEYnNiSDtmaBvkWsgRb34oh7oMs/edit?usp=sharing

Posted February 18, 2015 6:55 PM
by robgur scientist, admin

@Mr. Kevvy and @HelenBennett57

Here is the Google Doc MD68135 mentioned above, just C&P'ed below. Your feedback is really appreciated on what we have here, and we'd like to update the FAQ and notify the rest of the NFN contributors via blog, if that sounds ok? We'd be happy if you wanted to be listed as contributors/authors on the blog post but just let us know what you think etc.

CalBug Interface
1. Offer models of standardized formats for things like collector names, which show up in the data several ways. e.g. J Doe, MM Roe, KJ & LM Smith (no periods or spaces in initials, comma between one name & the next, use & for two people with same last name)
Answer:
I think this is already covered by #10 here: http://blog.notesfromnature.org/2014/04/17/faqs-and-useful-tools/
Is this not the same issue?
1. Advise what to do when tags add subspecies or show a taxonomic name different from the one already in the record.
Answer:
I think this is already covered by #11 here: http://blog.notesfromnature.org/2014/04/17/faqs-and-useful-tools/
Is this not the same issue?

Herbarium Interface
1. For the Herbarium, the advice is to transcribe collector names exactly as written - even when you are certain that they are the same people. In fact, everything except double-checked spelling mistakes should be transcribed exactly as written. This increases the chances of getting a consensus transcription, which can then be easily standardised by computer later.
Answer:
We are still asking for the collector names to be typed as written. This is a somewhat complicated issue since same collectors might appear to be very similar but aren't always the same. It can take know a lot of about the collector and where they deposited specimens to be able to make a definitive decision. With that said, we are very interested to see what you have discovered. Can you give an example of when you think collector names spelled differently represent the same person?
1. When the latest determination uses an abbreviation for the genus name, because the genus is the same as the previous/original determination, should we expand the genus name so that it makes sense when it's on its own, or transcribe as-is? Examples: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003mbn , http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003jz1
Answer:
Yes. Ideally the “determination label” or later added determination information should have everything spelled out. As you have found this is not always the case. If the first letter is the same it is safe to assume the same genus is being used. For example, J. marginatus would = Juncus marginatus and “Juncus” would be written out.
1. Should powerlines go in the location (because it helps you find a place), or habitat (because they imply a more open space and different microclimate)? Example: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003qbt
Answer:
I would put this in the Habitat field. I agree that it could help narrow down a location, but to me it says more about habitat where the plant was growing.
1. What do you enter when a record has two different counties? Example: http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN000412e
Answer:
From my experience, this doesn’t happen very often. It usually indicates that the collector wasn’t entirely sure which county they were in e.g. at the boundary between the two. When you encounter this, I would suggest going with the first county listed.

I did do a bit of sleuthing and in this case I think the collectors were trying to indicate that they were on the county line. The Flint River does have a road crossing near the Spalding / Fayette County line.
1. What do you enter when a record has two different dates?
Answer:
You should enter the first date only. This is also very uncommon on herbarium label so we chose to collect only one date.
1. On this record, would you rather have the scientific name as 'unidentified' or as the supposition? http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/subjects/ANN0003ynx
Answer:
This is a tough one! I can tell that the original collector (Carter) and the annotator (Kral) agree that it is in the genus Rhynchospora, but they just can’t get any further than that. Ideally you would just enter “Rhynchospora”, but leaving it blank (skipping it) would be acceptable. If the scientific name is blank or can’t be figured out then it should be skipped.
1. If "s.n." (sine numerum = no number) is listed as the Collector Number, is it better to leave the field empty or actually put "s.n." in it?
Answer:
I recommend leaving it blank, since ideally we would just have actual numbers in that field. Also many people - experts and non-experts - don’t know what s.n. refers to.
1. Should "floodplain" be in Habitat? I'm inclined to put it there as it describes a growing condition as floodplains are fertilized when flooded, other plants drowned, etc.
Answer:
Yes. I would put it into the habitat.
1. What is the convention for transcribing a date range as opposed to one specific day? (ie first, last or midway through the range)
Answer:
Enter the first date only. See also #5 above. It is worth noting the conventions in other collecting disciplines is to take a range of dates (e.g. insects and CalBug) but it isn’t for herbarium specimens.
1. If a specimen is cultivated at one location from cuttings/seeds/rhizomes collected at a second location, which should be the transcribed country/state/county/location, the first or second?
Answer:
Enter the place where it was actually collected. In this case the cultivated place. I haven’t seen the label, but it is likely a good idea to indicate the cultivated information in the habitat field.
1. Although we transcribe only the latest determination if there are multiple, should we also transcribe multiple synonyms in the same determination if they are listed, or just the first? (ie "Cyperus echinatus [=C. ovularis]")
Answer:
No. There is no need to add the synonyms, just enter the first or primary name. In this case “Cyperus echinatus.”
1. Should we also transcribe multiple collector numbers as written? ie "123 & 4567" (Probably an obvious "yes" but isn't formally in the Standards.)
Answer:
This could indicate that each collector gave the specimen a number in the field. This is an uncommon practice and even when it happens it doesn’t go on the same label. In this case, I suggest entering it exactly as is.
1. Should we transcribe location information that is printed into the template of the label rather than being added? (such as "Plants of the Great Dismal Swamp" or "Flora of Fort..." etc.)
Answer:
This is a bit of a judgement call, but in general the answer is yes if it is not indicated elsewhere. For example you often see “Plants of North Carolina” and the state is also indicated as North Carolina. In this case, the template really doesn’t give us any new information and it should not be entered. One should also be careful of institutional templates. For example, “Herbarium of Florida State University, Tallahassee.” Labels could have the name of a museum in Florida, but the specimen could be collected in Virginia.
1. Should we transcribe "Collected as part of a survey..." and other info that doesn't relate to this specimen per se?
Answer:
No. We do not expect you to transcribe this information. While it is interesting and potentially important we are also interested in keeping the process efficient and not overly time consuming.
1. Should we transcribe "sheet # of #" or other information indicating that this specimen is part of a set, but again is not just about this one per se?
Answer:
No. We do not expect you to transcribe this information.
1. Should we transcribe re-examination? ie "This specimen was examined as part of a study of..." that occurs years after the original label.
Answer:
No. This is part of the a series of information that relates to annotations of the specimens. It is not considered to be core information that we are trying to collect.
1. Should we transcribe personal comments that clearly have nothing to do with the specimen? (Thinking Philip E. Hyatt here for some reason).
Answer:
No. See #16 above which covers a similar issue. But if you find something awesome, interesting, etc. please post it in the talk forum!
1. If a word is hyphenated across two lines, do we remove the hyphen and join it? (Not including hyphenated word pairs of course. This is probably also an obvious "yes" but should be in the Standards formally.)
Answer:
Yes, please remove the hyphen.
1. Should we transcribe Habitat/Description (or other specimen-relevant) info in later, separate determinations? (sometimes the person who made it adds a comment with further info about the specimen, ie its condition or maturity.)
Answer:
Yes. If the annotation clearly contains information added by the collector that fits into one of the fields then add it.

General:

Mr Kevvy’s has generated a very useful set of custom dictionaries. They can be found here:
http://www.baldurdash.org/Herbarium&MacrofungiWordListDictionary5.0.zip

These dictionaries are a wonderful resource. It should be noted that scientific names can have gender based differences. You will see the specific epithet (commonly called the “species name”) with male and female genera spellings. An example albiflora is feminine and albiforus is masculine. The Carolina-poppy is Argemone albiflora (not albiflorus). Both albiflora and albiflorus are correctly spelled, but in this case albiflorus should never be used with the genus Argemone.

Posted February 19, 2015 5:50 PM
by DZM admin

Talk messes up the numbering system a bit when someone copy-pastes, so I recommend reading the Google doc, not the copypasta. 😃

Here's the Google doc one more time!

Posted February 19, 2015 6:42 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

@DZM, @md68135, @robgur et al.: Thank you. :^) Especial thanks for giving the old Dictionary a mention (I've put too many hours into that thing... lol.) I'm glad it's coming together.

Two additions:

There are some scientist responses in the Transcription Standards thread that are necessary inclusions. One of the things that will lead to concurrency woes down the road is going to be the requirement to split Location from Habitat/Description as sometimes they are interleaved rather than being separated (as noted in the thread); note Joan Ball's response which I then went and promptly forgot: not to add punctuation to split-off sentences! So having this standardized would be great.

And, a question I forgot to add that comes up often in Herbarium which I think may have been answered sometime but I can't find a citation for: Do we transcribe the "common name" of a specimen into Description if it's included or omit it, ie for a specimen that has "Rhus copallina (Shining Sumac}" would we just ignore the "(Shining Sumac}"? I'm pretty sure that we would as only the scientific name matters and that's how I've been doing them so far, but for concurrency it would be a good addition as there are quite a few like this.

Posted February 19, 2015 11:08 PM
by robgur scientist, admin

@DZM, @md68135, @robgur, @Mr. Kevvy Good point re: transcription standards. And yes I agree that we should exclude parenthetical common names when entering data. We can discover common names separately from other sources.

Posted February 20, 2015 4:37 PM
by escholzia

Two suggestions:

I was not aware of the FAQ until now, and have been classifying in CalBug for a while. I suggest you put a prominent link to it on the main page.

This guidance in the FAQ is confusing: 6.) Provinces: Provinces go in the Location field (e.g. Coastal Plain Province, Piedmont Province). The second field in CalBug is labelled State/Province. I have been entering all Provinces, Departments, etc. in the State/Province field, and I'd guess most other classifiers would naturally do the same.

Posted February 20, 2015 10:35 PM
by robgur scientist, admin

@escholzia Yes I think there might be two meanings of "province" --- an ecological and administrative one. Both may occur on labels and thus I think the right way forward is to use your own good sense to put the right kind of "province" instance in the right field. Does that make sense?

Posted February 21, 2015 11:43 PM
by escholzia

Oh yes, should have seen that the other kind of Province was referred to here.

Posted February 22, 2015 4:47 AM
by DZM admin

As I mentioned before, when you guys are finished with this, are you good to combine it with the "old" FAQ post in a new blog post?

When that's done, I can see about getting a link to it in the classification interface. Just let me know!!

Posted February 23, 2015 5:24 PM
by HelenBennett57

Will read! Been on leave this last week.

Posted February 24, 2015 2:26 PM
by Mr._Kevvy in response to DZM's comment.

re: "As I mentioned before, when you guys are finished with this, are you good to combine it with the "old" FAQ post in a new blog post?"

Isn't the first edition going to be put together by the scientists and we'll do the "maintenance" afterwards? High time I'd say. :^)

Oh, and one more question possibly worthy of inclusion: Should we filter out duplicate country/state/county info from the body text of the tag that is already in the dropdowns? Have been transcribing like that since the beginning.
Here is an example I just transcribed. It says "Flora of Alaska" at the top (which we don't transcribe directly as it's template data, but instead choose Alaska as the state) and also "Simeonof Island (D-1), Alaska" later in the body. As this ", Alaska" is redundant I would omit it, but this is another idea for the FAQ as anything that promotes consistency is a good thing.

Posted February 25, 2015 12:52 AM
by HelenBennett57

Hi,

I've read the doc and answers and am happy with the basic content. I'm assuming that all Q&A would be written in a question and answer format, i.e. there wouldn't be any references to other threads and other questions.

I'm also happy to do the initial editing and/or join in with later admin; and happy to be credited as co-author (that's Helen Bennett if you'd rather use a real-world name). But did you mean that, or did you mean were we happy for you to go ahead and post it after we'd read what's here?

Could we split out the FAQ for plants, bugs, birds and fungi under separate headings in the same post?

Where would the FAQ be available from? I would very much like to have a link to it from the transcription interface, and also from Talk. If that requires more developer time than is available, would it be possible for it to be a pinned Talk thread?

Helen

Posted February 25, 2015 5:36 PM
by DZM admin in response to Mr. Kevvy's comment.

Isn't the first edition going to be put together by the scientists and we'll do the "maintenance" afterwards? High time I'd say. :^)

I would like this best of all. The best way to do that would be:

Scientists assemble the complete FAQ
Scientists give it the FAQ to one of you
One of you posts the FAQ as a Talk thread
We link from the interface to that Talk thread
The person who posts the FAQ as a Talk thread is responsible for updating/maintaining it.

would it be possible for it to be a pinned Talk thread?

That's the idea.

But if the developers would rather have it be a blog post, because that looks more official, that's fine, too... but then they have to maintain it! 😃

Posted February 25, 2015 6:49 PM
by Shiphrah

Calbug questions
1. should we type out "Univ. Calif. Insect Survey Specimen # 123456" whenever there's a tag for it?
2. what order should we use for Other Notes? Sometimes there are several things, like "0800-0829" and "plant name" and "taking nectar under flower" plus the U Cal Specimen number.
3. since often one or two letters get covered by the pin, it'd be nice to have specific advice for transcription-- should I leave a blank space or X (both might be misunderstood) or some other symbol like ?
4. If we make any changes, such as looking up the name to fill in that missing letter, should we always comment #error and explain what we did?
5. I've read everything I could find about entering additional scientific names and am still unsure. The most common advice is use the most recent name, which in Calbug would be the" official" one already entered. So in Calbug should I ignore tags that give these names, or if they differ from the "official" name should I transcribe, and if so how much of it (e.g. include det. John Doe 1965) and what if it indicates the sex? (working on iPad makes cutting and pasting clumsy, but it can be done if helpful).
6. in locality distances are often given (6 mi N Somewhere) but occasionally a decimal. If it says .6 mi should I transcribe as written or add the standard 0 (0.6 mi)?
7. Someone suggested separating Faq by project. I strongly second that. Questions, field names, etc. are different in Calbug and Herbarium, and having them all mixed together is confusing.
  Thanks for the hard work!!!
Posted February 27, 2015 5:00 AM
by DZM admin

Is this still progressing? Hope we don't lose the momentum on this; I'd love to see an FAQ on this project!

Posted March 4, 2015 5:46 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

Another minor but still relevant quibble for the all-important concurrency of transcriptions, as it's been indicated that punctuation counts:

We are supposed to split Location from Habitat. Very often they are in the same sentence. Here is an example I just got: Merial Lake; abundant on wet sandy peat of lake edge; heads white. Now if it was a period after Merial Lake then we would just transcribe it with the period as it's enough of a sentence. But instead it has that semicolon, or more commonly there will be a comma. Should we eliminate it hanging from the end or leave it? I've been eliminating hanging non-terminal punctuation in these cases ie , ; :

Edit: This would apply to the Location/Habitat split for dangling prepositions as well. Example: "Gravel roadside of Hwy. x west of town of y." Would be split into Gravel roadside of Habitat and Hwy. x west of town of y. Location. Should that hanging of be dropped from the Habitat? Again, I've been doing so since I started.

Posted March 4, 2015 11:30 PM
by Mr._Kevvy

I uploaded an updated dictionary set; slightly different URL is: http://www.baldurdash.org/Herbarium&MacrofungiWordListDictionary5.1.zip
I made the change to the NFN Suggestions for FAQs

Posted March 16, 2015 3:54 AM
by md68135 scientist

Hi All!

A new FAQ has been posted:
http://blog.notesfromnature.org/2015/04/14/updated-faq-and-useful-tools-herbarium-interface/

We followed @Bonnie123 suggestion and are going to separated them based on the different interfaces. At this time you can still use the old FAQ for CalBug related issues.

Thanks for all your help and suggestions!

Posted April 14, 2015 10:21 PM
by Mr._Kevvy in response to md68135's comment.

Nice... I'll have a read. Apparently I was approved to "curate" the Herbarium FAQ but I'm still unsure as to how to go about this; I wrote to robgur but no reply yet, ie is it a matter of editing the Google Doc or some other method? Any info would be nice and please PM me if required.

Posted April 14, 2015 11:15 PM
by DZM admin

Hey, @md68135 ... would you like for me to get someone to add a link to this to the Herbarium interface?

Thanks!!

Posted April 16, 2015 11:06 PM
by HelenBennett57 in response to DZM's comment.

I certainly would, yes please!

Posted April 20, 2015 10:50 AM
by Mr._Kevvy

I'm currently editing the FAQ and I was uneasy at one of the answers I received so need to revisit and get some input:

*31.) Question: Should we transcribe "Collected as part of a survey..." and other info that doesn't relate to this specimen per se?

Answer:
No. We do not expect you to transcribe this information. While it is interesting and potentially important we are also interested in keeping the process efficient and not overly time consuming.*

My take on this: I'm volunteering so my time is the project's to be used however it will benefit the project. If this data is "interesting and potentially important" then eliminating it could jeopardize the usefulness and integrity of the resultant database, which would mean all of our effort and time was for nothing, a far worse result.

So, I would be more than willing to transcribe the info to preserve any possibly relevant data and avoid any negative outcome, and I doubt anyone else here would say differently...

Readded to bump this up so it gets seen.

Posted May 4, 2015 11:02 PM
by am.zooni

What Mr. Kevvy said. If I choose to work on a project, I want to do whatever is most useful to the project. So even if some info on the labels is only potentially useful, I'd be happy to transcribe it.

To the people who are running the project: tell us what info you want and how you want it entered, and we'll do our best to follow your instructions. Clear and plentiful examples will probably be helpful so that we volunteer produce results that are (relatively) consistent with each other and with your needs. The more you leave it up to us to figure out / guess what you want, the more likely we are to each diverge onto different paths.

Posted May 5, 2015 9:41 PM