OK that was it. Authority Files need to be encoded in ANSI/ASCII for Arches
to import them. Wouldn't it be better to use UTF-8?

Cheers,
Tobias


2014-04-01 17:48 GMT+02:00 Tobias Kohr <[email protected]>:

> Adding this line
>
> COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE.E55,COMPONENT CERTAINTY TYPE AUTHORITY
> DOCUMENT.csv,EH SOURCE DATA
>
> to ENTITY_TYPE_X_ADOC.csv doesn't solve the problem. What
> does authoritydocconceptschemename refer to? The DB scheme?
>
> The Authority Files should be encoded in UTF-8 (on Linux), right? Does
> with/without BOM make a difference?
> Notepad++ on Windows tells me that the Authority Files of the default cds
> package are encoded in ANSI, however, which surprises me.
> I will try to see if the error is an encoding problem.
>
> Best,
> Tobias
>
>
> 2014-04-01 17:16 GMT+02:00 Adam Lodge <[email protected]>:
>
> 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.

Reply via email to