Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update rank enumeration #148

Open
mdoering opened this issue Oct 7, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

Update rank enumeration #148

mdoering opened this issue Oct 7, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@mdoering
Copy link
Member

mdoering commented Oct 7, 2024

The Rank enum hasn't been updated in a while, with the latest version of the rank vocabulary living in the name-parser-api project.
Should we keep updating the gbif-api version from the name parser one or would it make sense to simply inherit/use the name parser one? ChecklistBank is already build on top of the name parser api.

@djtfmartin
Copy link

djtfmartin commented Oct 7, 2024

FWIW i've been removing references to the gbif-api Rank enum in favour of the rank vocab living in the name-parser-api project.
This includes the work on matching-ws, key-value-store, pipelines, occurrence repos for col / multi-taxonomy support.

@CecSve
Copy link

CecSve commented Oct 9, 2024

@djtfmartin it is not the plan to use the resource on the vocabulary server?

@mdoering
Copy link
Member Author

mdoering commented Oct 9, 2024

@CecSve many java code I know of uses methods and features of the Rank enumeration which the vocab server cannot supply. Personally I don't think we should force all vocabularies to the vocab server and the java enums provide some benefits we would otherwise lose (e.g. methods, distinct versions bundled with code, reproduceable tests, persistency by ordinal, name changes, ...). But we should be very clear for which vocabulary it is being used and not manage the same kind of vocabs in different places. Maybe we should all sit together once more and discuss pros/cons to come up with a plan when enums and when the vocab server is to be used? For checklistbank work I am certain I can never get rid of the java rank enumeration without a huge fallout.

@CecSve
Copy link

CecSve commented Oct 9, 2024

Yes, I would appreciate that. I am not proposing that the vocabulary server resources should always be used but a clear plan would be good. Next year, I plan to migrate the rest of the vocabularies to the vocabulary server. In the initial phase, I can make a list of the vocabularies and we can all sit down and go through it.

@MattBlissett
Copy link
Member

Perhaps we should add a new type of vocabulary to the vocabulary server, backed by a Java enumeration, so we can use the vocabulary server for managing parsing/matching and translations, but not defining the English terms.

(Although before anyone implements this, we need to check what we actually need and how it would be used.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants