-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
Feature Request - New Agent "unrecorded" #7608
Comments
Brought over from Issue #7434. |
I'd like to add that identification agent should be a required field to prevent accidental failures to add agents to this super important component of a record. With 'unrecorded' as an option there should be no problem with making this required. It is critical to be able to distinguish "data entry person made a mistake and forgot to add an agent' from "agent info is unavailable / unrecorded" |
First hat, technical perspective: Until and unless the @ArctosDB/agents-committee wants to set rules/guidelines/guardrails, there are no restrictions on agents or agent names. If you want to do WHATEVER, you can. Second hat, usage perspective: There's definitely some (sometimes very subtle) distinction between things like 'we know nothing' (always best represented by NULL) and "we're not telling you" and "we don't know and we'd like to tell you that" and "we looked and still don't know" and etc., and making that distinction would add a bit of utility to the data. Agent Zero has been carrying all of those roles and more, in part because we have required SOMETHING at various times and places - clearly a recipe to lose those distinctions. I think it would take a very careful set of users to avoid arbitrary application, and if that happens it would become a bit more difficult to find the "doesn't have data" stuff of any flavor in the mess (which isn't exactly disastrous, but still!). |
Agent "unrecorded" created Can I get assistance in changing all of my instances of: |
I doubt the personhoodedness of this agent... Confirm that this is them and I can update. |
Wow, that's a long list, but my spot check says yes to all. |
I still doubt the personhood.... |
Updated to "other agent" |
I spent 5 hours last week trying to get rid of "other" agents - is that a lost cause? |
done |
|
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
There are inconsistent uses of the agent "unknown". It is sometimes not an accurate representation of the status of certain kinds of agent roles. As a result there are likely hundreds of thousands of agent roles attributed to "unknown" when in actuality, someone knows the answer, it is just currently not available to the cataloger.
Describe what you're trying to accomplish
A new agent that can be meaningfully and intentionally attributed that accurately reflects the current status of knowledge surrounding that agent and does so in a more respectful manner. (E.g., creators of cultural objects and art are known by someone, but a collector either forgot who made the item or it was not written down based on field collecting standards of the time.)
Describe the solution you'd like
A new agent "unrecorded" would allows users to meaningfully assign an agent role that shows intent and truthfully represents the actions leading to the assigned agent. It will also indicate to viewers that the collection would welcome input from other users and members of the public to try and resolve the unrecorded agent.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
We would need guidance on migrating current uses of "unknown" agent to the new "unrecorded" agent. We would also require clear documentation on how to distinguish between agent "unknown" and agent "unrecorded."
@DerekSikes do you have any additional comments or rationale to add?
Priority
Normal priority.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: