-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
Missing CONFIDENCE value #69
Comments
This is what we have in CONFIDENCE:
Should we have a controlled vocabulary? |
I've just pinged the contributor of those records by email, I can't find his GitHub handle. They originate from Justin in Canada. Re controlled vocabulary, yes, some of those are certainly NOT confidence statements but rather statements of origins. We have a standard set of options in RMassBank, which could be a start for a controlled vocabulary. Eventually we should discuss a proper ontology with @sneumann to make various confidence statements compatible with the most commonly-used confidence level schemes (scheme, year, level ...). |
... and I could see we could unify some of those where just spacing and capitals are different ... so that we have fewer varieties of the same comment? |
There are 10 records having the tag
COMMENT: CONFIDENCE
without any confidence value. I think this should not be valid, so please create a rule for the validator and correct the confidence values.
This applies to:
AAFC/AC000433
AAFC/AC000427
AAFC/AC000428
AAFC/AC000432
AAFC/AC000429
AAFC/AC000425
AAFC/AC000431
AAFC/AC000430
AAFC/AC000434
AAFC/AC000426
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: