Skip to content
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

Add a "status" key #11

Closed
alix-tz opened this issue May 3, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Add a "status" key #11

alix-tz opened this issue May 3, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@alix-tz
Copy link
Member

alix-tz commented May 3, 2022

Mostly to enable filtering only the "clean" dataset and be able to distinguish those which would still be "in progress".

(This issue was raised by Peter Stokes and Daniel Stoekl)

@alix-tz alix-tz added enhancement New feature or request schema properties labels May 3, 2022
@PonteIneptique
Copy link
Member

Hmmmmm....
I am not sure I agree with this one. The main reason being that I expect people to forget about the catalog once they dropped their dataset on it.

@alix-tz
Copy link
Member Author

alix-tz commented May 3, 2022

That's a good point!

I think one should not use a dataset without checking what is inside first, since the datasets are not curated by HTR-United (and maybe this should be stated explicitly somewhere on the website). But Peter and Daniel also made a good point saying that the reliability of the catalog lays on the fact that the datasets are not gibberish.

Peter asked: what if someone creates a dataset that contains super wrong transcriptions? How would you "remove" it from the catalog?

Also, if you take the example of CREMMA-MSS-XXX: some of them are still work in progress and probably need to be made more homogenous. Shouldn't they be signaled as "in progress"?

@PonteIneptique
Copy link
Member

Décision 17/06/2022: Nobody changes the schema, but we add a button to report datasets.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants