{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/biocache-store/issues/105","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/biocache-store/issues/105/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/biocache-store/issues/105/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/biocache-store/issues/105/events","html_url":"https://github.com/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/biocache-store/issues/105","id":121955004,"number":105,"title":"Testing DQ checks: spatial - coordinates","user":{"login":"Mesibov","id":16182234,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/16182234?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov","html_url":"https://github.com/Mesibov","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Mesibov/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-12-14T00:23:07Z","updated_at":"2015-12-14T00:23:07Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Tested on 457075 beetle records downloaded 2 December 2015.\r\n\r\nThese 4 sightings did not have their lat/lons processed, although they could have been converted to DD:\r\n\r\nRecord ID\tLatitude - original\tLongitude - original\tgeodetic Datum\tLatitude - processed\tLongitude - processed\r\n5e3a2e05-1e80-4e1c-9394-ed6b37441b20\t37°56'9.10\"S\t145° 0'43.74\"E\tWGS84\r\nad379c33-2209-4a11-9ca0-061fd05d3c47\t34.0.0.S\t151.1.57 E\tWGS84\r\nbf6d8e4b-5a52-43f9-9385-eb5921ab2a5f\t34.0.0.S\t151.1.57 E\tWGS84\r\n97edaa77-643b-41c6-9771-ed8473430dc4\t37deg, 53'24.14\"\" S\t14deg, 13'17.56\"\" E\tWGS84\r\n\r\nwhile these 4 wildly erroneous lats and lons did get processed:\r\nRecord ID\tLatitude - original\tLongitude - original\tgeodetic Datum\tLatitude - processed\tLongitude - processed\r\n0a52cf60-a577-47a8-b2d2-f5f8a3ab945a\t-17534\t146.532\tWGS84\t-17534.0\t146.532\r\nf7702819-cf89-4739-8b62-064c6c312b60\t-17534\t146.532\tWGS84\t-17534.0\t146.532\r\n03f2c64c-b269-4a34-b66b-ed626c8b172c\t-21.155\t1148.166\tWGS84\t-21.155\t1148.166\r\n27eda356-8001-4d4f-a8a8-0a0e8f41bc13\t-27.35\t1340.8\t\t-27.35\t1340.8\r\n\r\nThe 'true' flags for these last 4 records were 'Coordinates are out of range for species' and 'Coordinates dont match supplied country'. The original lat/lons could have been filtered and quickly fixed.\r\n\r\n--\r\n\r\nZero latitude (Supplied latitude is zero)\r\n\r\n2 of the 'false'-flagged records (supplied latitude not zero or blank) have no supplied latitudeand are false negatives. The lat/lons weren't processed, but lats could be estimated from 'Locality':\r\n\r\n5c5bab0c-62fa-4617-af6a-37a7bb9e5f9f\r\nTesserodon henryi\t17 miles W Atherton\t[blank lat]\t145.483337\t\t1975-02-10\r\n966a3fb4-7641-48f4-a751-7938154ba182\r\nTesserodon henryi\t17?20 miles W Atherton\t[blank lat]\t145.483337\t1975-02-10\r\n[Locality is '17–20 miles W Atherton' in original]\r\n\r\nThis 'false'-flagged record has the supplied latitude '0° N', but this has mysteriously disappeared in processing. The record is from Sumatra.\r\nb9f01a71-0ba6-4b83-9b7c-8af71eac3fe0\r\nXylotrupes gideon\t[blank lat]\t102.0\r\n\r\n--\r\n\r\nCoordinates converted from UTM\tCoordinates derived from verbatim coordinates\tCoordinates are transposed\r\n442401\tfalse\tfalse\tfalse\r\n14339\ttrue\tfalse\tfalse\r\n275\tfalse\ttrue\tfalse\r\n60\tfalse\tfalse\ttrue\r\n\r\nIn the '275' group, for example\r\nhttp://biocache.ala.org.au/occurrences/74a03759-5f7d-4e06-86e9-4d57edace27e\r\nthe processed lat/lon is exactly the same as the verbatim lat/lon (in DD) as supplied. Why could the supplied lat/lon not be given in the ALA record as original lat/lon?\r\n\r\nThe '60' group of transposed records are all for '145.4413' '-38.022', from Laura Levens' project at 290 Leppitt Rd, Upper Beaconsfield.\r\nVerbatim longitude \t5790.5 E \t\r\nVerbatim latitude \t363 S\r\nThese are *UTM* coordinates in correct order. Since the 'Coordinates derived from verbatim coordinates' flag is 'false', does that mean someone at ALA looked up the lat/lon of '290 Leppitt Rd, Upper Beaconsfield'? If instead they were indeed converted from UTM to lat/lon, not only should that flag be 'true', the order should have been reversed so that original lat/lons weren't transposed.\r\n\r\n--\r\n\r\nLatitude - original\tLongitude - original\tLatitude - processed\tLongitude - processed\r\n-43.490074569426525\t146.5994439879235\t-43.490074569426525\t146.5994439879235\r\n\r\nALA should get a 'fidelity' award for these, of which there are thousands. The original figures probably come from a DMS > DD calculation done by the data provider, who didn't bother rounding off to an appropriate number of decimal places. ALA has faithfully reproduced this nonsense. For the latitude, the 14th decimal place is about 1.1 nanometres, the diameter of a glucose molecule.\r\n\r\nThe beetles data set I checked has 30665 records in which the processed longitude has 14 decimal places."}}