Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Common name problems #30

Open
ctc3d opened this issue Dec 7, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

Common name problems #30

ctc3d opened this issue Dec 7, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@ctc3d
Copy link

ctc3d commented Dec 7, 2019

Docs error?
The Common Use Case says:
Resolve common taxa
# View the list of authorities supported by resolve_comm_taxa
view_authorities()
I get
# Error in view_authorities() : could not find function "view_authorities"
view_taxa_authorities() gives the information for common, so that's okay, but the instructions are off.

resolve_comm_taxa() itself isn't very useful, seeming to just add the common name to taxa_clean. I assume that's a limitation of the authorities, but it's injecting a different kind of data into that field; I didn't find any cases where information was added or improved.

@clnsmth
Copy link
Contributor

clnsmth commented Dec 21, 2019

Thanks @ctc3d. I'll fix the documentation issue ASAP.

Adding the common name to taxa_clean is the expected behavior (i.e. if the name is not of the scientific nomenclature then is it colloquial?). Perhaps a separate field for common names would be more useful so both types of information can be included?

@ctc3d
Copy link
Author

ctc3d commented Dec 30, 2019

Yeah, a separate field like common_clean or something might be a good idea. My immediate problem is that some of these inventories -- curse them -- only have common names, which are hard to do much with at our next step. I was hoping TCR/ITIS might take a stab at guessing a scientific name from a common name -- but I recognize that that's probably a little Holy Grailish.

I can see how for any results more advanced than what TCR is already providing it kind of has to work interactively, with the whole other ball of wax that that implies and so could be beyond your reasonable scope.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants