Leading subspecies IDs should change the obs taxon like leading IDs of other ranks

#1

Currently subspecies IDs only move the observation ID forward if there are at least 2 IDs for that subspecies (unless the only ID on the observation is a subspecies level ID). Can we change the behavior to something like “move the observation ID as if the subspecies ID were at the species level”?

Current behavior:
Left at class level because there is a class level ID followed by a single subspecies ID.

Moved to species level because there is a class level ID followed by a species level ID.

At subspecies because the subspecies ID is the only ID.

Desired behavior:

I think some would actually prefer that a single subspecies ID move the observation ID to the subspecies level, the question is how does that interact with Needs ID vs RG? If an observation is RG at species level, I think many/most don’t want to move it to Needs ID at the subspecies level with a single subspecies ID (which is why the current behavior exists in the first place).

A couple reasons to want to advance the observation ID: to be able to find the observation via species filters, and to have the auto-obscure work appropriately at the species level.

0 Likes

#2

i think this ties into a broader issue of how subspecies are treated. Some myself included don’t think people should add a subspecies ID by range only (don’t call it Sierra lodgepole pine just because it’s in the Sierras, if you can’t see the characters that define the subspecies) because it’s self-reinforcing and at best tells you nothing and at worst masks variability in subspecies range. Maybe letting a user choose for themselves, but it may bee too complex or specific an ask. I do agree the system could be tweaked to be less confusing.

1 Like

#3

Forgot to reply to the thread about this in the Google Group. I talked with Ken-ichi about it and yes, we think this would be ideal but we have not been able to figure out a way to do that and prevent situations where a sequence like sp1 sp1, ssp1 results in the obs taxon being ssp1 and the obs being Research Grade. So I think this is an issue of how to code it rather than this being something we don’t desire.

7 Likes

#4

FYI, I changed the subject of this thread to be more specific, since it wasn’t clear to me what was being proposed here while perusing the thread titles. And yes, like Tony said, I banged my head against this problem for a while when we initially separated the obs taxon and the community taxon (which I still don’t love) and didn’t come up with a good solution.

0 Likes

#5

For reference, the link to the Google Groups post: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/inaturalist/KnDFoW6BNok/dOXSr4GsDgAJ

(I though you guys didn’t see it :sweat_smile:)

0 Likes

#6

@kueda should we close this topic as this is already on our radar but have not determined a method for it? Then anyone who voted for it will get their votes back.

2 Likes

#7

Works for me.

0 Likes

closed #8
0 Likes