Re: [Gdpdm-devel] New accession identifier in GDPDM

[Ken Youens-C. <kc...@cs...>]

On Nov 3, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Peter Bradbury wrote:

> One thing missing from GDPDM that we might want to consider adding  
> is information about which combination of fields in each table  
> determine a unique record.

One other point I meant to make in response to this suggestion is  
that it places an additional burden on the curator to know which  
combination of fields determines uniqueness.  It would change on a  
table-by-table basis, whereas a single "accession" field would be  
forever unambiguous.  Further, requiring several fields to identify a  
record means one typo in one field could mean duplication.  I believe  
it's too much to ask of human curators given how complex this schema  
is, how much human effort is required to curate the data, and how  
limited their options are at this time for inserting it.

ky