Hi Phil and all, In the absence of any further enlightenment from a GIS specialist, we would like to add these two grid references as 2 new nodes to node: Place_Site Location.E53. I presume this is legitimate? I have tried putting them in the location description box but the search does not work if they are both in there. I expect, to do this in a GIS manner, we should include these surveys overlays and search using the location filter, by drawing a polygon over the grid in order to get a list of sites in the grid. But I do not see the overlays on the search view. I see that Adam Cox put in a grid reference using an overlay on his Cane River Project. What suggestions do you have Adam?
Thank you, Lucy On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 5:16:37 PM UTC+2, Carlisle, Philip wrote: > > Hi Lucy, > > Thanks for the explanation. I think you need to ask the GIS specialists > about this one. > > > > Phil > > > > *Phil Carlisle* > > Data Standards Supervisor > > Data Standards Unit, Listing Group > > Historic England > > The Engine House > > Fire Fly Avenue > > Swindon > > SN2 2EH > > Tel: +44 (0)1793 414824 > > > > http://thesaurus.historicengland.org.uk/ > > http://www.heritagedata.org/blog/ > > > > *From:* Lucy Fletcher-Jones [mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>] > *Sent:* 01 December 2015 14:45 > *To:* Carlisle, Philip > *Subject:* Re: [Arches] Re: Authority Files and Mandatory Input Fields > > > > Hi Phil, > > Thank you for your reply. > > The grid references we wish to enter are for 2 different surveys of Egypt: > one that was done by Britain in the 1920s and one by a joint UK/US > operation, an aerial survey, in the 1940s (JOG reference). Both are very > important to Egyptologists for locating sites but both sets of surveyors, > in their wisdom, decided to ignore normal latitude and longitude and > instead they divided Egypt into grids, of about 2500sqkm in the latter > case. So we have JOG references such as NG 36-06, NH 34-08. We could find > the corresponding Lat/long for each corner of the grid but it would be time > consuming and anyway the reference is what is commonly used and understood. > Should we create a new node? > > > > Lucy > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 1 Dec 2015, at 16:30, Carlisle, Philip < > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > Hi Lucy, > > I hope all is well in Egypt. Here’s my thoughts. > > 1. Surely the grid references are being used to generate a geometry? > The E45. Address nodes should only be used for postal addresses. > > 2. Setting types can be used as you say. > > 3. Dynasty – this is fine. We use Victorian to specify the reign of > Queen Victoria so there’s no reason why you can’t add the dynasties. Just > make your vocabulary consistent and comprehensible. Maybe something like > ‘Reign of Rameses II’ rather than just ‘Rameses II’ > > Phil > > > > *Phil Carlisle* > > Data Standards Supervisor > > Data Standards Unit, Listing Group > > Historic England > > The Engine House > > Fire Fly Avenue > > Swindon > > SN2 2EH > > Tel: +44 (0)1793 414824 > > > > http://thesaurus.historicengland.org.uk/ > > http://www.heritagedata.org/blog/ > > > > *From:* [email protected] <javascript:> [ > mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>] *On Behalf Of *Lucinda > Fletcher-Jones > *Sent:* 01 December 2015 07:58 > *To:* Arches Project > *Subject:* Re: [Arches] Re: Authority Files and Mandatory Input Fields > > > > Hi Phil, > > > > I thought I'd posted a reply to this last week but I cannot see it in this > thread. Thank you very much for your helpful input. I have a few other > questions for you on standards. > > 1. Address node in Location, for a heritage resource: Understandably we > have no street addresses for our Egyptian sites but we do have some map > grid references which we need to input somewhere. I originally thought of > using the external cross reference node but as it is a location reference, > it more properly belongs to the location data. Can we use the address node > (E.45) for this purpose? > > > > 2. Also, we wish to use 'Setting types', Place Site Location (E.53) for > environmental setting type of a site . e.g under lake Nasser!! I think this > is correct usage? > > > > 3. We wish to add Dynasty and Ruler to our cultural period. Egyptology > rarely uses real dates mostly date is defined by cultural > period/dynasty/ruler. I wish to add the Dynasty as a new node related to > cultural period (a subset?) and then relate the ruler to Dynasty. Is this > correct? We have authority files for each. > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 12:23:57 PM UTC+2, Carlisle, Philip wrote: > > Hi Lucy, > > You would be breaking the rules if you used the Type for your list but the > way you’ve suggested is fine. I’d add ‘Governate’ as your only > Administrative_Subdivision_Type.E55 but then associate a new authority file > to the E48. As E48 is a Place Name and these are usually subject to a > gazetteer then a E48- P71- E32 triple is acceptable where E32 is your > Governate authority file. > > > > Phil > > > > *Phil Carlisle* > > Data Standards Supervisor > > Data Standards Unit, Listing Group > > Historic England > > The Engine House > > Fire Fly Avenue > > Swindon > > SN2 2EH > > Tel: +44 (0)1793 414824 > > > > http://thesaurus.historicengland.org.uk/ > > http://www.heritagedata.org/blog/ > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Lucy FJ > *Sent:* 24 November 2015 09:48 > *To:* Arches Project > *Subject:* Re: [Arches] Re: Authority Files and Mandatory Input Fields > > > > Hi Adam, > > > > Thank you for your reply. On consideration, we don't wish to completely > change the structure of the database, but we do wish to add new data fields > (nodes and edges) and change some labels on the input forms. > > > > I do have a question on keeping to standards. On the Heritage Resource > E18 graph, Place, E53 has a branch to 'Administrative Sub division.E48' > which has an 'Administrative_Subdivision_Type E.55 and a corresponding > authority file. We would like to put in Egyptian Governorates as our only > administrative sub division and have a drop down list of those > governorates. Can we simply use the 'Administrative_Subdivision_Type.E55' > for the list of Governorates, and remove the 'name' box on the form? It > seems that this is bending the rules. Alternatively, do we need to remove > the' Administrative Subdivision Type E55' and simply relate a mew authoirty > file containing the governorates to the Administrative Subdivision.E48 node? > > > > > > Thank you very much, Lucy > > . > > On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:45:54 PM UTC+2, Adam Cox wrote: > > Hi Lucy, I'd recommend that you take a look at the graphs themselves, > because they are the most important part of the database. On the graphs, > you'll see that there are authority documents at the end of many branches: > the graphs define what authority documents must be included on install. > > > > It really sounds like you are actually interested in redefining the > structure of the database, which means modifying the graphs. I've put > together some information about that here > <http://archesproject.org/implementation-considerations/>, so you can see > what kind of level of effort it will take to accomplish that. That said, > if you do not want to modify the graphs, you *could *just make an > authority document blank by deleting all of its content. This will lead to > some empty dropdown menus in the forms... > > On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 3:39:34 AM UTC-6, Lucy FJ wrote: > > HI Adam, > > > > Sorry for this late thank you but we made a breakthrough in our Arches > project last week (see separate post) and I was showing the project to my > manager. > > Your answer is helpful but I am still not sure about authority files that > we will not be using. if we change the files themselves as you suggest > prior to installation, should we simply delete the information in the > authority files we are not using or not load them? > > > > Thank you, > > Lucy > > On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 8:06:16 PM UTC+2, Adam Cox wrote: > > Hi Lucy, sorry for the late reply on this. > > > > There are two ways to load authority files: by setting the > CONCEPT_SCHEME_LOCATIONS in your settings.py and then running > > *python manage.py packages -o install* > > This will completely reinstall your packages and replace the existing > database, which means that any resources you've entered will be lost, and > any changes you've made in the RDM will be lost (because those changes are > stored in the database, not in the authority files themselves. > > > > The other way to load authority documents is by using the command you > listed already. You don't actually need to have the authority files in the > my_hip_app directory (though it would probably be good to place them > somewhere close to it at least) because you specify the directory location > in the command itself. If, for example, you have them in > C:\Projects\authority_files, your command would look like this: > > *python manage.py packages -o load_concept_scheme -s > 'C:/Projects/authority_files'* > > However, I believe that running that command will add all the schemes in > your authority documents to the database, and not overwrite any existing > ones that match. I don't there is a way to "unload" existing concepts, so > if you try this repeatedly you will end up with duplicate concepts. > > > > Personally, I recommend making substantial changes to the authority > documents themselves prior to the installation. That way you can reinstall > the package as much as you need (because editing graphs require a > reinstall) without losing any information. > > > > Hope that helps! > > Adam > > > > On Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 11:32:49 AM UTC-6, Lucy FJ wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > > > Thank you once again for your very helpful input. > > > > The documentation was very helpful in explaining how to create our own > customized authority files using a text editor but I have just a couple > more questions on loading our own customized files. Do you place the > customized authority files in the custom database, currently called > 'my-hip-app' and then run the following command to load them: > > > > $ python manage.py packages -o load_concept_scheme -s 'path to authority > files directory' > > > > We will only be using a very few authority files for the first phase of > our project. Will Arches work with just a few authority files, or do we > need to load 'dummy' ones? So far we have been using the full set of sample > files so haven't tried this out. > > > > Thank you very much, > > Lucy > > > Lucy Fletcher-Jones > > Egypt Database Project > > TMP Room 2181, HUSS Building AUC New Campus > > Tel: 02 2615 1760 > > Mobile: 010 1633 8367 > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Adam Cox <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Lucy, hopefully this information will address your questions. > > > > 1. The authority files are actually only used during the package install > process. Once you have installed the package, any changes you make in the > RDM are not reflected in the files themselves, but are contained in your > database. You can export the schema that you've created to a skos file, > but I don't know of a way to retro-actively create authority files (i.e. > based on changes that have been made through the RDM. As I mentioned in > this considerations document > <http://archesproject.org/implementation-considerations/>, personally I > recommend making all of the changes to the authority files before the > package install, because then you can reinstall without any trouble. > > > > 2. You'll need to modify the forms themselves, which has come up here > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/archesproject/forms/archesproject/_YyRG8wFUGs/EhXHFmB6w28J>and > > here > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/archesproject/hannes/archesproject/aQEYrTFaJsA/qV1IfKzsobkJ>(and > > perhaps elsewhere) on the forum already. It's a bit of an involved > process, so it would be best to get help from someone with good javascript > and html skills. > > > > Adam > > > On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 7:40:46 AM UTC-5, Lucy FJ wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I have two unrelated questions: > > > > 1. I have modified several authority files through the Reference Data > Manager and would like to see these modified versions in the database but > we cannot find them. Where do they reside? > > > > 2. There are many input fields (boxes) on the input forms that we do not > need but they appear to be mandatory. We have loaded up the sample > reference data. Is there a simple way to makes these fields optional > without needing to change the program? i.e. I am looking for a user method > of being able to ignore these fields. > > > > Thank you very much for any help, > > > > Lucy > > > > > > > > -- > -- 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 a topic in the > Google Groups "Arches Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/archesproject/QOUoumJpLHc/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. > > > > > > We are the public body that looks after England's historic environment. We > champion historic places, helping people to understand, value and care for > them, now and for the future. > > Sign up to our enewsletter to keep up to date with our latest news, advice > and listings. > > > > HistoricEngland.org.uk Twitter: @HistoricEngland > > > > This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal > views which are not the views of Historic England unless specifically stated. > If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system and > notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or disclose the information > in any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to Historic > England may become publicly available. > > > > > > ... -- -- 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.
