I have a additional request, but maybe you think otherwise.
A field where people can enter theyr search link to the whole set.
It would be nice if the whole set as a link field, every one can form and enter his link as he whish.
Of course he also can do it in the description, but if it is in the section of the fields it would maybe be more overviewable if some one just search the set link and does not want to search through the whole description. It would be a bit more tabular.
Just an idea
I think as you demonstrated, it can be done with the field as it is now. I do think that it is better to include it in the description or a comment if you want to make the set more easily accessed.
I only use the obs# from the url because I know it will be unique, and it is very short (currently 8 digits) so easy to write onto a container when I am raising on lepidoptera. You can use descriptive forms too, as the original field description stated.
You can create your own observation field too… if you are certain that that is how you would like to handle the sets, then you can create the second field for that purpose. Just be aware that the fields and names they get is a “non-regulated space” as it were, so try not to go too overboard with creating lots of fields, and consider other inatters when coming up with names etc.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observation_fields
there is a “New observation field” button at the bottom of that list
Ah, its perfect
I have corrected every thing as you said.
Starting point is https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/30439664
This can be used to include the whole set into a project, where it will have a meaningfull picture
In a project there will only appear the sarting point
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/bern-forensische-tiere
If some one is interested in animals which can be involved in the decomposting process of a species they click on the specific animal and this will lead to the whole set.
Set Link is https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?verifiable=any&place_id=any&field:Similar%20observation%20set=30439664
This can be used to share the set on other websites.
Its perfect, your idea is very usefull
1 Like
Just one thing more.
Its important to say, links in the app, to https://www.inaturalist.org/observations* are actualy grayed out. This absolute great system does only work on the website. In the app its not possible to open directly linked observations or search links, sadly at the moment.
How ever, the system works perfectly on the website and is realy a ultimative feauture!
Every one should know about this, i hope it gets some how officialy integrated to inaturalist, mentoined in the help files or directly integrated with some fancy buttons.
Thanks once more
1 Like
@tiwane I’m wanting to add to the tutorial here, but it seems editing is closed for it. Are you able to re-allow editing?
1 Like
Are you able to edit it now?
Thanks, edit done :)
OK. I’ll probably put the 30 day edit limit back into effect, though.
You could also turn it into a wiki.
I want to shine a light on the field “Observation group” as this field is recommended for repeated observations of the same individual.The field “Similar Observation set” is not intended for this kind of use and should therefore not be used for repeated observations of the same individual. Please consider this before making this thread a tutorial.
PS: As phone app users do not seem to see these observation field connections, I restarted “hardwiring” via identical photos or direct links in the description.
This is not the case at all! “Observation Group” was created first, and I realised it long after I had created “Similar Observation Set” and this tutorial, but both have a number of iNatters that use them. In the tutorial I even mention that you can create more of the same, if the name of the field doesn’t gel with your purpose!
If you look at who created the “Similar Observation Set” field, you will see that it was me, and my intention was for it to be used for this kind of use. Unless of course you know more about my intentions than I do!
The “observation field” feature is a sort of “open access” situation with little regulation, and that flexibility is very powerful. Please don’t shut that down with made up rules…
3 Likes
Thanks for creating these fields! I dont want to make up rules, and i certainly do not know more about your intentions than you. All i do is using my reading skills. I think it makes sense to encourage users, to use their reading skills too. We do certainly not want to train iNat users on ignoring recommendations on the iNat website, while they are uploading observations, or do we?
That is just my 2 cents, as i told you I am barely using these 2 field nowadays. Which means my opinion on how to use them, might anyway not weight as much as yours.
What recommendations are you referring to?
This looks like the public iNat information on how to use these fields. I am sure you wrote at least one of them.
.
Ok, I see where you are getting your position from now.
The is the old description of the field, and has been changed twice since then. When it was realised it had a lot more practical uses besides just “linking unknown taxa”, the description was amended, but a second amendment since then brought about the realisation that the description can only be 255 characters (or some such limit), so I instead changed the description to point to this tutorial, where it was thought other uses might continue to be described.
For clarity, here is the new description that appears to iNat users:
1 Like
…and I am back to not being able to edit the tutorial to change that graphic! I’m not going to bother changing it, the issue has been resolved here in the comments, anyone confused can read through and find it.
1 Like
It’s now editable in perpetuity.
4 Likes
Thanks kiwifergus for explaining that field in a perfect way. Already using it. Very helpful!
1 Like
@kiwifergus I wonder if we should be making a separate field to keep track of observations that look to be the same unknown taxon. I’ve been using “similar observation set” to keep track of the same individuals that I observe over time (like your caterpillar rearing example, or the same trees flowering each year). Tracking the same individuals through time is conceptually different from pulling together observations of many individuals from different places and times of what may be one undescribed species. What you you think about peeling off that separate function into a separate field? Or do we need a “same individual again” field?