You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
in some cases like Christian Frh. von Ehrenfels the APIS version should be the newer one (as the online version was published in 2016), but it isnt. Thus, check needs to be on the text and not the dates.
in some cases like Christian Frh. von Ehrenfels the APIS version should be the newer one (as the online version was published in 2016), but it isnt. Thus, check needs to be on the text and not the dates.
You mean we should look at the reversion dates of the texts instead of the reversion dates of the entity itself? The date of the apis version is taken from the reversion (or its 2017 if there is none)
no, I mean we need to actually compare the texts. The reversion dates from APIS stem from the import we did. Apparently some of the XMLs where outdated (or didnt exist yet) when we loaded the data. Thus the reversion date is newer as the publication date of the XML. So to find out that - though the dates suggest that the APIS version is the latest available text - the XML version from 2016 is newer than APIS we need to actually compare "Haupttexts"
eg for Alan Berg there has been an updated online version in 2020, but the outdated APIS version is still the current one.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: