| Issue Number | 5324 |
|---|---|
| Summary | Automate alternate glossary term stage names |
| Created | 2024-04-08 15:27:51 |
| Issue Type | Task |
| Submitted By | Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C] |
| Assigned To | Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C] |
| Status | Closed |
| Resolved | 2024-06-27 14:24:37 |
| Resolution | Won't Fix |
| Path | /home/bkline/backups/jira/ocecdr/issue.430898 |
This is a followup for report issue OCECDR-5318. Create software to automate as much of the work as possible for modifying the CDR glossary's stage terms to support finding stages using the alternate Arabic numerals for the stage names.
~oseipokuw Please post your notes to this ticket. I'm going to need a place to post my own comments, and I didn't want to hold off any longer, lest I risk losing some of the information. 😉
Here are the test run results for a first cut at a global change for a two-phase approach.
https://cdr-dev.cancer.gov/cgi-bin/cdr/ShowGlobalChangeTestResults.py?dir=2024-04-08_15-19-33
The first phase is this global change to plug in placeholders in the
DefinitionText elements of the concept documents and insert
the corresponding ReplacementText elements into the
existing name documents.
The second phase would be a script which creates the new name documents for the Arabic number alternate stage names, cloned from the original Roman-numeral versions. I modified the original specifications, which called for finding all of the terms whose names begin with "stage" except for those which begin with "stage 0" because when I used the original logic I ended up with stages which had already been created with Arabic numbers. Basically I'm getting all of the glossary terms which start with "Stage I" or "Stage V" for the English name.
I posted a question via email last week asking if any consideration had been given to just creating the new Arabic-version name documents without altering the definitions, on the theory that this would achieve the original goal (as I understand it) of supporting searches looking for stages with the Arabic numbers rather than the standard Roman numerals, but I haven't gotten any responses yet..
We have a few recommendations for cloning the glossary term names. They are nice to have, so if they cannot be done or if LOE is high, please ignore them.
Please exclude the following elements/blocks from the cloned documents if possible:
Comments
Date Last Modified
Existing Processing Statuses
Please add the following block if possible:
Processing Statuses with a Processing Status Value of “ Ready for publishing”
If possible, use system date at the time of cloning for:
Term Name Status Date
Translated Name Status Date
None of these should be difficult.
We have decided not to add these alternate stage names. Google is correctly serving up the Roman numeral content even when an Arabic term is used in the search query, so this is not needed for SEO reasons.
Elapsed: 0:00:00.001943