Hm strange. Working for me now. Might’ve been something weird with my browser or internet connection.
Hi, I hope it’s ok to ask a question here! I am trying to add Life Stage annotations to all Lepidoptera observations lacking them in my state. I can get that easily with:
&taxon_id=47157&place_id=49&without_term_id=1
However I’d also like to eliminate any observations where the Evidence of Presence was a Leafmine, so I tried to tack on:
&term_id=22&without_term_value_id=32
But that narrows the field to only observations that have an Evidence of Presence value, excluding leafmine, when I’d like to include observations that don’t have an Evidence of Presence value as well. Is there a workaround for this? Sorry if this has already been addressed, it’s a lot of comments to sort through T_T
Thanks everyone for your instruction and patience!
You can’t do both things at once with the current functionality.
The suggested alternative is to go through all the observations which entirely lack an Evidence of Presence Annotation, and separately go through all the observations which do have Evidence of Presence, but where the value is something other than Leafmine.
You can see further discussion here and in other topics linked to that one.
there is a workaround using projects: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?not_in_project=evidence-of-presence-leafmine&taxon_id=47157&place_id=49&without_term_id=1
Thank you both!
Thanks for this reply. It seems like I also can’t use more than one value for “&without_term_id=”, ie, I can’t search for observations lacking Life Stage annotations and lacking Evidence of Presence annotations at the same time. Is that correct? If so, it seems like quite the oversight to have so many annotation fields but only be able to toggle one at a time ![]()
it seems like quite the oversight
i don’t think it’s right to characterize this as an oversight. you always design and implement things to balance functionality and practicality. if you make something that handles every possible use case out there but it takes forever to get results back or if it’s super difficult to maintain, then that’s not great. let’s be happy for what we already have. if you want to make a case for more functionality, you can always discuss more in the other thread that jwidness referenced above.
I agree that functionality, practicality, and maintenance need to be considered for sure. It just feels like I can get halfway to so many options. For example, I can use “&term_id=1,17&term_value_id=19” to get Dead with Life Stage, but I can’t add a number to the value id to get Dead with Specific Life Stage, so I can’t look up dead caterpillars.
I’m not trying to sound ungrateful, and I’m well aware this is probably more difficult to implement than I imagine. It’s just odd to see the options I want right there but not be able to use them, if that makes sense.
Thanks for your replies ![]()
&members_of_project=to find only observations by people who have joined the project (versus all observations that qualify for inclusion in the project)
I just tried using this query, but nothing happened, so I assume some extra text is meant to come after the =
what are the accepted values? I’ve tried ‘true’ and ‘yes’, but neither of those worked either
ah I’m very stupid, obviously it’s the name of the project that’s meant to come afterwards…
I was appending that string to the URL when I was already in the project of interest, and expecting it to magically work