Feature Request - display_name under GUID on catalog record page

[DerekSikes]

Issue Documentation is http://handbook.arctosdb.org/how_to/How-to-Use-Issues-in-Arctos.html

Can we get the display_name of the scientific name on the catalog record page?

In the screenshot below - I would like the name under the GUID UAMObs:Ento:247317 to have the author of the scientific name displayed

so it would be Sciara serpens Pereira, Heller & Sutou, 2023
instead of just Sciara serpens

similar to how MCZBase displays the author on their UI:

https://mczbase.mcz.harvard.edu/guid/MCZ:Ent:8674

Priority
Please assign a priority-label. Unprioritized issues gets sent into a black hole of despair.
normal

[dustymc]

get the display_name of the scientific name on the catalog record page?

In isolation as requested

Probably not, because then everything would be inconsistent.

As flat.scientific_name

Changing the identification in the cache - what's displayed there and lots of other places - seems somewhat plausible. I have those data in the cache, one more IF statement is probably affordable, but I also sorta expect that to find some interesting way to melt something or do something weird that doesn't work for some collections or similar. This would be a major global change, at least a full AWG meeting discussion would be warranted. (See also #7695 for some history of how identification cache works.)

"Given unlimited resources..."

Just to be complete: There's an API, those data (when they exist) are available from it, you can display them however you want.

My Recommendation

The "correct" (simple, predictable, controllable) solution is probably just to call things what you want them to be called; you have (and always have had) the power to make https://arctos.database.museum/guid/UAMObs:Ento:247317/IID16322193 read Pereira, Heller & Sutou, 2023 instead of Sciara serpens (https://handbook.arctosdb.org/documentation/identification.html#a-string-formula). Given specific requests I can possibly even somehow magic some of that, although all else being equal I'd expect the chance to review the data would be valuable?

MCZbase

I don't think MCZbase (exactly one 100% predictable classification per name, as far as I know) is a useful comparison. (But it is interesting that you get a 404 if you click their identification-aimed-at-taxonomy link - complexity, even under super-simple data, finds ways to be interesting...)

[DerekSikes]

I'll just add that, in case it's not obvious, I'm pretty sure this sort of display of name authors is what most people who care about taxonomy (eg most entomology curators, including those shopping around for a new CMS), expect a CMS to do.

[dustymc]

in case it's not obvious

Please pretend I just rolled off the printer and nothing is obvious.

On that note, perhaps I've completely misunderstood the original request. "expect a CMS to do" makes me think you're looking for tighter rules than Arctos generally needs, not just a rearrangement of metadata? (#4384 was proposed for such things.)

I think the expectations of any non-Arctos user looking for a CMS won't align with "all of Arctos," particularly in identification-land. A potential user will probably expect Arctos to do some very limited things, all of which are simple, relatively flat, and were entirely anticipated by programmers. ('One accepted ID that uses exactly one taxon, which is part of a table which includes exactly one set of "rank columns"' is I believe the standard expectation.) The idea that a taxa might have many shapes (circumscriptions, classifications, whatever you want to call them), or that taxa and those 'shapes' have useful identifiers, or the idea that two collections might see a taxon (or just a name) in two ways, or the idea that many opinions might all be treated identically (except as 'wrong'), or that one identification might use many taxa, or etc., etc., etc. probably aren't on anyone's checklist. "Core Arctos" provides all that and more and expects the user to use what they need of it, and Arctos as a whole needs that capability and complexity, but maybe an individual collection doesn't, and maybe we could do something about that if such needs could be sufficiently described.

[DerekSikes]

UI enhancement is good but adding the link to the classification (that already exists for the topmost ID once it become unhidden via clicking) would also be nice.