Hi, I feel a little stupid asking this, but which file do you mean with ENTITY_TYPE_X_AUTHDOC.csv? (Perhaps already the solution to my problem?)
Cheers, Tobias On Tuesday, April 1, 2014 4:46:28 PM UTC+2, Adam Lodge wrote: > > Tobias, > > Could you send me a the COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > file and the ENTITY_TYPE_X_AUTHDOC.csv file? With those, I can probably > tell you what the issue is. > > Adam > > -- > Adam Lodge > Geospatial Systems Consultant > Farallon Geographics > 415.317.6625 > > On Tuesday, April 1, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Tobias Kohr wrote: > > Hi Dennis, Koen, et al. > > we will have a closer look at the CIDOC extension and try to keep in mind > that people have different interpretations for uncerainty. > > Regarding the technical implementation we're encountering problems in step > 3, running install_packages.sh which throws the following error: > > root@srv-i3-fundstellendb:/arches-web/archesproject/build# source > install_packages.sh > Install packages defined in settings.py > operation: install > ...||ABSOLUTE DATING METHOD AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.VALUES.CSV > ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMPONENT TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE (ARTIFACT) TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE (SITE) TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHAEOLOGICAL TECHNIQUE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHES RESOURCE CROSS-REFERENCE RELATIONSHIP TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHES RESOURCE CROSS-REFERENCE RELATIONSHIP TYPE AUTHORITY > DOCUMENT.VALUES.CSV > ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENT TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > ARCHITECTURAL TECHNIQUE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "../manage.py", line 28, in <module> > execute_from_command_line(sys.argv) > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/virtualenv/ENV/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/management/__init__.py", > > line 399, in execute_from_command_line > utility.execute() > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/virtualenv/ENV/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/management/__init__.py", > > line 392, in execute > self.fetch_command(subcommand).run_from_argv(self.argv) > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/virtualenv/ENV/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/management/base.py", > > line 242, in run_from_argv > self.execute(*args, **options.__dict__) > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/virtualenv/ENV/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/django/core/management/base.py", > > line 285, in execute > output = self.handle(*args, **options) > File "/arches-web/archesproject/build/management/commands/packages.py", > line 47, in handle > self.load_package(package) > File "/arches-web/archesproject/build/management/commands/packages.py", > line 52, in load_package > install(settings.ROOT_DIR) > File "/arches-web/archesproject/packages/cdscert/setup.py", line 60, in > install > authority_files.load_authority_files(package_settings.ROOT_DIR) > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/packages/cdscert/install/authority_files.py", > line 22, in load_authority_files > load_authority_file(cursor, mapping_files_directory, file_name) > File > "/arches-web/archesproject/packages/cdscert/install/authority_files.py", > line 63, in load_authority_file > concepts.insert_concept(settings.DATA_CONCEPT_SCHEME, > adoc_dict['PREFLABEL'], '', 'en-us', adoc_dict['CONCEPTID']) > KeyError: 'CONCEPTID' > > Our provisional Authority Files look like this: > > - COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.csv > conceptid,PrefLabel,AltLabels,ParentConceptid,ConceptType,Provider > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_1,certain,,COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY > DOCUMENT.csv,Index,i3mainz > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_2,uncertain,,COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY > DOCUMENT.csv,Index,i3mainz > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_3,unknown,,COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY > DOCUMENT.csv,Index,i3mainz > > - COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.values.csv (do we need this > one?) > conceptid,Value,ValueType,Provider > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_1,1,sortorder,i3mainz > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_2,2,sortorder,i3mainz > COMPONENT_CERTAINTY_3,3,sortorder,i3mainz > > Can anybody tell us what's wrong with our conceptid? Does the > authority_files.py search for the ID in any additional place, where we > should reference it? > > Cheers, > Tobias > > On Monday, March 31, 2014 11:22:27 PM UTC+2, Koen Van Daele wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just wanted to get back at what Dennis said at the beginning of this > thread. Im quite curious how you will get people to agree on (un)certainty. > If feels like a very natural idea to talk and think about, but I haven't > really seen it function properly in practice. > > We once did an experiment where we had 10 people who were used to entering > data in our archaeological inventory system enter the same site. We paired > the archaeologists: one more more experienced data entry person (a few > years experience) and one newbie (a few months), so they would be forced to > really think things through and discuss. In our database we have a field > for certain the data entry person is about the location of the site, ie. > about the polygon they might have drawn on a map. This field only allowed 5 > choices, ranging from 1 (I'm sure it's exactly where it needs to be) to 5 > (I have no idea whatsoever where the site is). We had a very detailed > manual with examples of all these cases, what to use when, ... > Final result of our experiment: every group had entered the location with > a different level of certainty. So, based on the exact same information > they had all drawn totally different conclusions. And this was about > something as simple as the location of the site. > > So, I'm very curious about how you manage to prevent stuff like this from > happening. > > The other thing I wonder about: how does certainty affect searching? > Should a search for 'churches' only return sites that have a certain > "certainty" attached to the interpretation? Are you working with sliding > scale of certainty (ie. we are 75% percent certain about this statement) or > a binary one (we're certain or uncertain)? > > Cheers, > Koen > ________________________________________ > Van: [email protected] [[email protected]] namens > [email protected] [[email protected]] > Verzonden: donderdag 27 maart 2014 22:36 > Aan: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > Onderwerp: Re: [Arches] "uncertain information" in Arches > > Thomas, > > Good question! You are quite correct that we haven’t tried to include > uncertainty in Arches. > > One reason is pretty basic: certainty is quite subjective from person to > person. For example: most people agree that the earth is spherical. But a > “flat-earther” may be very certain that the earth is not a sphere, but is > instead a plane. His certainty does not make him correct, it merely states > the degree to which he believes in his interpretation. Clearly, you can be > very certain and very wrong at the same time. I guess my point is that in > many cases “certainty” says more about the person making the assertion than > it does about the thing being described. > > OK, all philosophy aside, one could easily extend any Arches graph to > include a “certainty node”. Such a node could point to a thesaurus (as > many of the nodes in Arches already do), allowing a user to select from a > list of “uncertainty levels”. Really, any Arches graph could include a > “certainty node” under any entity that you might want to qualify (for > example, one certainty node for period and another certainty node for > heritage type). > > Really, the hard part is not in getting Arches to allow you to add an > “uncertainty level” to your cultural heritage data. Rather, the difficult > thing is to decide how you’ll get different people to agree on what > constitutes certain vs. uncertain interpretations of heritage. > > Sorry that I can’t be any more helpful… However, I’m very interested to > hear how you will model uncertainty and how you will get people to > implement it consistently. Please keep me posted! > > Cheers, > > Dennis > > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 2:41, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > > I have a question about conceptual modeling in CIDOC CRM, maybe there is > someone one the list who is able to provide some guidance. > > As posted before, we are trying to integrate research data of neolithic > sites into Arches. Now, naturally a significant part of this data has a > level of "certainty" to which the information is correct. e.g. a site can > consist of some features for certain (in this case modeled in the > Archaeological Heritage (Site).E27 - Component.E18 relationship) but if > others exist is uncertain. We believe this valuable information should not > get lost (quite often theory construction is based on such information). > > For example it could be uncertain if an archaeological feature is to be > named "pit" or "ditch" - or if it exists at all. Another example could be > the questionable relationship of a findspot to a certain archaeological > period. To make it even more difficult, different authors could have > different thoughts on that. > > As far as we can see, the expression of such "uncertainty" is not covered > by Arches yet. Is there a concept for the integration of such data in the > future? We are currently thinking into potential solutions but are > struggeling to find adequate expressions for uncertain information in > CIDOC. > > thanks, Thomas > > -- > -- To post, send email to [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>. To unsubscribe, send email to > [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>. For more information, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en > --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Arches Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe, > send email to [email protected]. For more information, > visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Arches Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > -- To post, send email to [email protected] <javascript:>. To > unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > For more information, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Arches Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]. For more information, visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Arches Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
