Bug #700
closed
Implement redesigned plant taxonomy data model
Added by Michael Lee about 22 years ago.
Updated about 18 years ago.
Description
There is a critical error in the form of scientific names being loaded in the
name field only once, even if the name with authors field varies. By far the
best solution is to make name-with-author a separate name system, but will
require some substanative changes in applications, and will require a reloading
of the plant data. Must be done in November. Potentially critical for release.
Files
as per new means of loading - pending RKP approval
Only one concept, with no correlations, 1 status, and 4 usages.
The above attachment (#45) must be downloaded and then renamed to have a .mdb
extension, then it will open in Access.
We should probably delete plantName.plantNameWithAuthor field, as this will no
longer be needed. We could also ignore the field. But for the sake of avoiding
future confusion, we should probably delete the field while we make changes to
the plant taxon module. This will also make it an exact mirror of the comm
module, which has no such field.
- Bug 687 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The original comment related to this bug suggests it is a 'critical error' in
loading of names -- instead it is, in reality, related to an oversight in the
design of the taxonomy data-model. Bug 685, which this bug relies on, includes
the redesign of the taxonomy data model and the redesign of the application code
that supports it -- including the legacy data loaders, the on-line 'new' data
loaders, the on-line web query interface, and the mechinism for loading plots
(which strongly need the taxonomy databases). Bug 685, in itself, requires
database design changes, application code changes, and user interface changes;
and this bug is the implementation of these design changes. Seeing that this is
a bug related to the code changes, it would be wise to add an enumeration of the
code changes, but doing so would be premature.
I am uncertain how to interpret comment #5. Is this simply a reiteration that
this bug cannot be resolved until bug 685 is resolved? I believe JH and I
agree that in effect this is not really a true error, but simply an
implementation step that must follow the resolution of bug 685.
changed from components that are to be deleted to "misc" so that bugs don't get
deleted with component. Sorry for all the email.
Original Bugzilla ID was 700
Also available in: Atom
PDF