I'm not sure, but it's the first thing I'd try. Adam On Apr 1, 2014 8:14 AM, "Tobias Kohr" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Adam, > > alright, I was not aware of the existence of this file (using Arches v2). > I guess we need include our newly defined entity type here. Is this the > reason for the error? > > Thanks! > -Tobias > > > 2014-04-01 17:02 GMT+02:00 Adam Lodge <[email protected]>: > >> 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 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:th >> [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:archesproject+ >> [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:archesproject+ >> [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:archesproject+ >> [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. >> >> >> -- >> -- 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. >> >> >> > -- -- 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.
