Exported search results- duplicate date for "identified" and "collected"

Bug Reports
,
1

In which Wildbook did the issue occur? Spotting Giant Sea Bass

What operating system were you using? (eg. MacOS 10.15.3) macOS 10.15.5

What web browser were you using? (eg. Chrome 79) Chrome Version 83.0.4103.116

What is your role on the site? (admin, researcher, etc) Researcher

What happened? Encounter search results exported as Excel spreadsheet (.xls) file in OBIS format have columns listing year, month, day identified, and a separate set of columns listing year, month, day collected. It appears that the dates for both of these are duplicated with the collected date being listed twice.
For example, this encounter was occurred 2020-06-04 and was not identified until 2020-07-10, but the exported results show 2020-06-04 for both collected and identified.

What did you expect to happen? We expected the date collected to reflect the date the encounter occurred, and the date identified to reflect the date the encounter was assigned an individual ID

What are some steps we could take to reproduce the issue? **Encounters > Approved Encounters> Export> Exported as Excel spreadsheet (.xls) file in OBIS format **

If this is a bulk import report, send the spreadsheet to services@wildme.org with the email subject line matching your bug report

2

Hello,

Thanks for reporting this.

We don’t store ‘date identified’ in Wildbook outside of the framework of timestamps for the
last time an encounter record was modified.

I’m not sure why the columns were formatted this way originally, it may have been a specific use case for export to OBIS Seamap.

If in the future we engineer a simple encounter export separate from the OBIS format, this duplication will not be present. I’ll make a work ticket for it removing this- WB-660. Do be aware the since this is duplication not omission and there may soon be a newer general export this is not an immediate action item.

Thanks.

1 Like
3

We have addressed this in the new export format that was added, but will not be addressing it in the existing OBIS format, so we don’t break the mapping patterns we currently have.
Thanks!
Tanya