Field Slips

[mo-nathan]

This provides the key functionality needed for Field Slips. See #1947 for the issue and #1896 for a more detailed discussion.

This PR delivers the functionality where there is a route that accepts a field slip code. The /qr/:code route is provided for simplicity and brevity. To test you probably want to update some projects with field slip prefixes. For example, if you're working with a recent database dump you could add the prefix '6F' to the First Fantastic Fungal Friends Foray Festival! or 'NFAL' to North Falmouth Fungi. You can then exercise the new functionality with URLs like:

localhost:3000/qr/6F-0001
localhost:3000/qr/NFAL-0001

The #1947 has a checklist of functionality that I added as part of the PR to get to the point where it feels like a cohesive whole.

If you want to try it starting from a QR code, you can create QR codes here: https://www.the-qrcode-generator.com/

[mo-nathan]

@nimmolo Thanks for the comments. Happy to follow your suggestions. Most of the code is actually from rails generate scaffold. I was just trying to get something working as a starting point. Did you see my comment in #general in Slack? I'm trying to figure out how to make the matrix_box in app/views/field_slips/_field_slip.html.erb look reasonable instead of ultra skinny. I'm guessing there's some reasonably simple way to do that. I played around with it a bit but I'm hopeless with front end stuff.

[JoeCohen]

I pushed a short (failing) integration test exposing the bug. You can run it with:
rails t test/integration/capybara/field_slips_integration_test.rb
Sorry I didn't get any further.

If -- without using Field Slips -- I create an Observation, fill in the fields with something that violates project constraints, and click Create,
it:

• redisplays the create_observation form with a flash warning ("This observation violates the constraints of one or more selected projects")
• does NOT create an Observation until I again click Create.

But if I scan a field slip, click Create New Observation, fill in constraint-violating info, then

• it redisplays the create_observation form, gives me the flash warning,
• BUT immediately creates an Observation (apparently including the FieldSlip, but ignoring namings, images).

[mo-nathan]

To do:

• Fix double observation bug
• Fix titles (include a rename for the "New field slip" header)
• Fix system tests

[mo-nathan]

localhost:3000/qr/6F-0001 Last Observation is a surprise. I expected it to show my last Observation. Instead it's showing the Obs at the top of the Activity Feed, which:

• was created 2013-06-23,
• updated 2024-03-20 06:34:14 PDT (-0700)
• created by Vlad Lekach (laddycans)
• for which I proposed a Name
• is the local copy of https://mushroomobserver.org/137413

From checking through the new method in ObservationView#last_observation, I believe @mo-nathan has it pulling the last viewed observation by the current user, and that may not be the expected obs.

This is a really interesting case. I can see an argument for limiting it to observations the current user created, but I think there is a legitimate use case where someone like a project admin might want to create a field slip object that the user creating the observation didn't know to create. I'm hoping the use of the last observation feature is more of a rare power user thing and if they legitimately want to create a field slip for someone else's observation I think they should have a way to do that (e.g., a project admin sees an observation that should have been included that has a photo of the field slip, but the field slip link is on the observation). Maybe I should add a comment on the page making it clearer that this is the last observation you viewed and if you view another observation in another window and reload the page or rescan the same QR code after visiting the observation you care about, then it will update. Does that seem reasonable?

[mo-nathan]

I pushed a short (failing) integration test exposing the bug. You can run it with: rails t test/integration/capybara/field_slips_integration_test.rb Sorry I didn't get any further.

If -- without using Field Slips -- I create an Observation, fill in the fields with something that violates project constraints, and click Create, it:

• redisplays the create_observation form with a flash warning ("This observation violates the constraints of one or more selected projects")
• does NOT create an Observation until I again click Create.

But if I scan a field slip, click Create New Observation, fill in constraint-violating info, then

• it redisplays the create_observation form, gives me the flash warning,
• BUT immediately creates an Observation (apparently including the FieldSlip, but ignoring namings, images).

Thanks for the test! Turns out the fix was quite simple. I was ignoring the success flag. I also need to pass the field_code param to the next page.

[coveralls]

coverage: 94.394% (+0.02%) from 94.372%
when pulling 246e7d4 on njw-field-slips
into dcffad0 on main.

[JoeCohen]

I banged on field slips for a while.
A possible issue: inconsistent relation among FieldSlip, Observation, Project.
Here's what I did:

• Added a FS prefix to an existing project. (In my case I added SARCO to http://localhost:3000/projects/337.)

• Created an Observation, which was not in the Project
• Pasted http://localhost:3000/qr/SARCO-0001 into the address bar, selected Last Observation (the one I just created).

Result:

• Created a FieldSlip, correctly relating it to the Observation and the Project:

---

• Updated the Observation, adding the FieldSlip #, but not the Project:

---

• Did not add the Observation to the Project.

[nimmolo]

Attempted some improved markup for the form on #2063 - it's a PR off this branch

[mo-nathan]

I banged on field slips for a while. A possible issue: inconsistent relation among FieldSlip, Observation, Project. Here's what I did:

• Added a FS prefix to an existing project. (In my case I added SARCO to http://localhost:3000/projects/337.)

* Created an Observation, **which was not in the Project** * Pasted http://localhost:3000/qr/SARCO-0001 into the address bar, selected Last Observation (the one I just created).

Result:

• Created a FieldSlip, correctly relating it to the Observation and the Project:

* Updated the Observation, adding the FieldSlip #, but not the Project: * Did not add the Observation to the Project.

Interesting case. I see what you're driving at. Howevver, I am imagining that observations associated with field slips that are not associated with the same project to be reasonable common in the long run. The case I'm thinking of are folks who go to events that are using MO field slips and walk away with a bunch of them. In this case it seems reasonable to associate the field slip with the project (due to the prefix) and this could be useful once we have forms associated with projects, but if the observation doesn't meet the constraints of the project, then it's legit for it not to be added. I guess it would be fine to add it to the project if it meets the contraints, but not if it doesn't with appropriate flash messages.

[mo-nathan]

Resolved last observation getting added to project.