Tobias,

No such thing as a stupid question.   

Assuming that you are running v2 of Arches, the file should exist in this 
folder: source_data\concepts\authority_files , and its name is actually 
ENTITY_TYPE_X_ADOC.csv  

If you're running an earlier version, just send me COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE 
AUTHORITY DOCUMENT.CSV and we'll start there.

--  
Adam Lodge
Geospatial Systems Consultant
Farallon Geographics
415.317.6625


On Tuesday, April 1, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Tobias Kohr wrote:

> 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 (http://install_packages.sh) which 
> > > throws the following error:
> > >  
> > > root@srv-i3-fundstellendb:/arches-web/archesproject/build# source 
> > > install_packages.sh (http://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] 
> (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].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to