Display order of fields

[schmikloi]

No description provided.

[schmikloi]

Order in the overview table

it should be Taxon Name, Family, Genus. Species, Author(s), Status, Accepted Taxon, Rank, Biogeographic Distribution (please note the typo in here!), Environmental Information

Why is there only the species name in the "Taxon Name" column for all the synonyms?

[schmikloi]

Order in the detailed view

• Author(s) should better be displayed in the table above (Valid/accepted names), where there is Genus, Species etc...
• Conservation Status needs to be above Conservation Comments

[schmikloi]

tab in the edit mode

• why does the taxon name here only display the species-part (i.e. virens)?
• order is ok for the rest

[dimasciput]

@schmikloi

Why is there only the species name in the "Taxon Name" column for all the synonyms?

There's a bug with this, I will fix it.

why does the taxon name here only display the species-part (i.e. virens)?

I think it's because you can't edit the genus name here (Eucypris), if you want to edit the genus name you need to click the edit parent.
cc @helendallas

[helendallas]

It is a. bit confusing to only have species part of taxon name here...not sure if there is a solution?

Maybe It shouldn't read Taxon name but rather the level you are editing?

Genus?
Species?
Subspecies?

The Taxon is the same as what we always use. the combination

[schmikloi]

To my mind it could be moved down under the Genus line.
And it should be called "Species".
And what is called Species now should then be "Taxon name".

[helendallas]

I am not sure I understand @schmikloi

For me it would be good to have Taxon name, showing the full taxon name, i.e. the highest taxonomic level that is in the database, and that it should be after Subspecies and before Author.

@dimasciput Is it possible to revise the order. I think changing names is going to complicate things more.

The species should just be the species part?????

[schmikloi]

@helendallas
to my understanding the genus name is "Afronemoura"
the species name is "spinulata"
and the taxon name is "Afroneumura spinulata"

really correct would be the following terminology: The first part of the name – the generic name – identifies the [genus] to which the species belongs, whereas the second part – the specific name or specific epithet – distinguishes the species within the genus...

that being said we could leave the order as is, just show the entire Taxon Name in the respective field, i.e. "Afroneumura spinulata" and not only "spinulata"

what do you think @helendallas ?

[helendallas]

Agreed - That's fine. For me its important that Taxon name includes the full name as we have in all other BIMS versions, as you have indicated above

[dimasciput]

This has been updated

[helendallas]

@dimasciput Some species are now coming through with genus and species. I suspect thins to do with old data and or data uploaded and edited etc.

@schmikloi I would suggest that we deploy all to production before Dimas goes on leave so that you cna start with a Clea slate and then set up users, experts and then start preparing and uploading cleaned taxon lists.

I am going to close this ticket as completed

[helendallas]

Unfortunately column header is not matching information show. It is correct on FADA but incorrect on others:

FBIS

SANParks

Kafue

[schmikloi]

two issues from this thread are still open; I will move them into new tickets