I am currently using Microsoft Academic's datadump for a project and unable to identify the total number of theses & dissertations(T&D) present. Based on their website, 38% of data is categorised to OTHERS type (one among them is T&D). But their 60+GB CSV dump doesn't explicitly indicate the T&D records. Can someone help me with the statistics for T&D or how find the same?
I tried their API too and unable to find using their API too.
The Microsoft Academic Graph does not explicitly segment publication sub-types by thesis or dissertations, which means that neither the API or website will either.
If this is something you'd like to see added, please let them know by using the "Feedback" link in the lower-right corner on the Microsoft Academic website.
I would like to Dimension the family instances. What is the reference I should be provided while creating dimension.
I have tried with several approaches but the dimensions are not getting deleted when I delete the family instances. This means that, the dimensions are not getting attached to the family instances.
Please help.
Have you found a way to address this manually through the user interface? That is mostly the best place to start when tackling a Revit API task. If you can solve it through the UI, the chances are good it can also be automated. If no UI solution is found, automation is mostly impossible as well.
I would analyse the exact differences caused in the Revit database on the elements involved and their parameters by executing the manual modification. Once you have discovered exactly what is changed by the manual UI interaction, you can probably replicate the same changes programmatically through the API. Here is a more exhaustive description of how to address a Revit API programming task:
http://thebuildingcoder.typepad.com/blog/2017/01/virtues-of-reproduction-research-mep-settings-ontology.html#3
I am trying to create an app that will help users find restaurants/movie theaters/malls/etc. to hang out based on ratings and distance. Other than just the place itself, I would also like to know more detailed information about the place. For example, if I were to look for parks, I would also like to know if theres a basketball or tennis court there. Ratings and popularity would also be an important aspect to prioritize suggestions.
After looking through all three of the APIs, I could not really find any substantial differences other than their search limits. Could anyone really differentiate each API for me? Maybe even recommend one based on my specific need?
Thanks!
The Foursquare API would fit this use case perfectly because you can supply very specific filters through the API. Also, they have extensive coverage around the world, unlike Google or Yelp.
I would check out the venues/explore endpoint and use a categoryId of Parks. You can use a query parameter of "basketball" or "tennis" to find parks that have courts for these.
I am very new to GIS development, and to be be frank I have no background about it at all. I searched the web but the tutorials I found seemed to assume the reader has some background information.
the thing is that I am confused about what to read or learn, there seems to be lots of technologies, and I feel lost since some speak about openlayers, geoserver, mapserver, google maps, and open street maps.
So here is what I am supposed to develop, and I hove you could give me an advice about which technology to use, and where should I start reading - given that I know almost nothing -.
Case 1: a closed system for about 20 users only, who can specify locations on the map, and the web application will store the latitude and longitude of the locations and show the markers. I wanted to use google maps api, but I cancelled that since there license requires you to purchase the service if the system is a closed one. so what technology should I use in such case? I need a free option, also I will be only using web server, so if the solution includes using my own geoserver, or something like that I won't be able to do it.
Case 2: I am supposed to display the roads and routes between two given points, and probably add some notes on the map. For this I case I can use my own map server/geo server, but again I want your suggestions.
of course the solution need to be open source
finally, I hope you could tell me what to start reading first,
Start by looking over at https://gis.stackexchange.com/, starting with the tags [web-mapping] and
Some topics in particluar you may want to look at are:
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/8113/steps-to-start-web-mapping
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/8238/where-how-to-learn-about-getting-started-with-web-gis
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/13868/looking-for-a-developer-friendly-web-gis
As for skills and tuorials, look at:
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/17227/free-gis-workshops-tutorials-and-applied-learning-material
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/913/web-gis-development-skill-sets
I've been a JIRA and Bugzilla admin in past jobs, and have quite often had users ask for the ability to have more than one assignee per issue.
I know this is possible in JIRA, but to my mind it never makes sense; an issue should represent a piece of work, and only one person can do a piece of work (at least in software, I've never used an issue tracker for a 2-man bobsled team ;-)) A large piece of work will obviously involve more than one person, but I think in that case it should be split into subtasks to allow for accurate status reporting.
Does anyone have any use cases where it's valid to have multiple assignees ?
The Assignee field means many things to many people. A better name might be "Responsible User". There are three cases I discuss with my clients:
A. number of assignees = 0
JIRA has an Allow Unassigned issues option but I discourage use of that because if a work item isn't owned by anyone it tends to be ignored by everyone.
B. number of assignees = 1
The default case
C. number of assignees > 1
Who is responsible for the work item represented by the issue? The best case I've seen for this is that when an issue can be handled by any one person in a team, so before triage the issue is assigned to everyone in that team. I think a better approach is to create a JIRA user with an email address that sends to the whole team, and assign it to that user. Then a member of the team can have the issue assigned to them in particular.
Changing the one assignee case has the history recorded in the History tab. Nothing is lost in that case.
I'll often have a story / feature that can be split across multiple developers. They will have individually assigned subtasks but it would make sense to assign the parent to all involved, unless there's a lead developer. I wasn't actually aware that I could do multiple assignments, so thanks for the tip!
The other case I can think of is pair programming.
I hit upon this question while looking for solutions to doing this. Since I want to do this, I'm guessing my use case counts as an answer to your question: I only really want one assignee in the sense of someone currently working on a problem, but I want to track the whole lifecycle of an issue. For us, that can mean:
A support person receives a report from a customer, creates an issue
An issue-wrangler reviews the issue to make sure it's valid, not duplicated, has all appropriate details, etc.
A developer implements/fixes the issue
A tester performs whatever tests are appropriate (in our case, mostly extending our automated testsuite to additionally test the feature/fix)
An operations person rolls out the new version to a test environment
A support person informs the customer, who does his own tests with the new version in the test environment
An operations person rolls out the new version to production
Not all issues necessarily go through all steps. Some issues have more steps (e.g. a code review between step 3 and 4). Many issues will also move backwards among the steps (developer needs more information, we go from step 3 to 1 or 2; tester spots a problem, we go from 4 to 3).
At each stage, only one person is actually responsible for whatever's got to be done. Nevertheless, there are a whole bunch of people who are associated with the issue. Tracking systems we've used are happy to offer easy changes to previous owners of the issue (shown as a list), but I'd ideally like to go a step further, with the owner automatically reverting to the correct prior owner depending on the issue's status. At step 6, the original support person from step 1 should ideally contact the customer. At step 7, the ops person from step 5 would ideally be the assignee.
In other words, while I don't want multiple assignees for a given step, I do want there to be a "support assignee", a "developer assignee", a "testing assignee", etc.
We can do this with subtasks and we can do it by manually selecting previous owners when changing statuses, but neither is ideal and I think the situation above is one where multiple assignees would make sense.
In my company, we have a similar workflow to Nikhil. We work in a scrum model, with developers, testers and a technical writer on each team.
The workflow of a development task is
Development -> Developer review -> QA testing -> PO Acceptance -> Done
The workflow of a QA task is
QA writes test case / automated test -> QA review -> Done
We had a tool which JIRA replaced that allowed us to assign multiple people to a task, which we found very useful for our workflow. On a QA task, I could easily see if the other tester on my team had already done work and I needed to do the next step.
Without this, I am finding it difficult to quickly identify tasks written by the other tester on my scrum team which are ready for me to review (versus the ones I wrote which they need to review).
So many people have asked for the ability to have multiple assignees since at least 2007. They have varying, valid use cases. I was disappointed that the JIRA development team unilaterally said they won't implement this and would ask them to reconsider.
https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-12841
While pair-group working (pair programming etc..) it would be nice to assign both persons to the issue.
Tasks move through different steps through development (example: Development, review, testing). Different persons can be responsible for each step. Even though the task may be in review or testing, the reviewer will have stuff fore the developer to fix. Having different roles to assign to would help organizing the work.
In our team we usually develop 1 or 2 persons together.
Then the code is reviewed by around 2-5 persons in individually or in pairs
Then it is tested by 1-2 persons initially, finally tested by the whole team.
Currently our system allows us to assign a single person at a given time. That limits our ability to follow who is working on what without looking through the log for the issue. The benifits of beeing able to assign multiple persons would be good for us.
What happens if John is assigned a task and cannot finish it, and it is moved to Jane's list because John was a slacker?
Are you OK with losing history of who it was originally assigned to, and the hours that were spent / billed on it?
In an e-Learning scenario, it makes sense to have an issue assigned to multiple users.
Here is what I want to do:
I have a storyboard which I want to assign to 3 people at the same time - the animators, the recording artists and the graphic designers. Once these people finish their tasks, they will pass it on to a common reviewer, who will review and close the issue.
Graphically it would look something like this:
Storyboard
/ | \
graphics animator recording
\ | /
reviewer
|
done
The three job roles depend only on one storyboard. The compilation of the three have to go to a reviewer. I'm racking my brains to get this working on redmine. Haven't found a solution yet.
Got this answer from an Atlassian partner https://www.isostech.com/solutions/
and then later from Atlassian
Objective:
Want to set who does the works for each step on an issue
Summary:
Use a plugin to copy values from custom fields into the assignee field whenever the issue transitions to a new step.
How:
1. Install the Suite Utilities plug-in:
This plug-in adds a bunch of new functionalities to workflows.
You will use the plug-in to copy the value of a custom field to the assignee:
Create a custom field as single user picker for each role i.e., dev, tester, reviewer to be assigned at different steps in the issue
Add these fields to the issue type's screen
Modify the post-function on the workflow transition between each step
Add a "Copy Value From Other Field" post function and set it to copy the value from the appropriate user custom field into the assignee field.