Example here - https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/738816/thistle-in-flower
On the previous version of iSpot the interactions were listed in the linguistic direction based on the one you were looking at. Here they would both show as “Thistle in Flower a flower being visited by [organism]”.
On this entry though it seems to just keep the syntax as I set it so it shows
“Thistle in Flower a flower being visited by Tiger” and “Incidental Hover visiting a flower of Thistle in flower”.
That’s not wrong but I found the previous version more elegant.
Agreed!! Silly concept: very confusing when one wants to follow interactions by opening them. You have to remember that the current observation could be anywhere, and the interaction anywhere.
In the good old days the interacting organism was always on the right, and one did not have to do a double take when the pictures were the same or there were lots of interactions and remembering which is which was not necessary.
Bug # 462
But it is worse: the use of titles instead of IDs makes for inelegant reading. There is a good southern African one: I will try an find it. Once an ID is given the scientific name should replace it.
Bug #481
At least it is not duplicated like thousands of southern African cases. (Two for one: the new iSpot interaction)
Bug#512
titles:
Some putu to supplement the wors
eating
The Sunbirds scoff the nectar, not the pollen
Bush with white rimmed purple flowers attracting many critters
associated with
Black bug with light legs surfaced again
Bush with white rimmed purple flowers attracting many critters
associated with
B at the bottom is alive
Bush with white rimmed purple flowers attracting many critters
associated with
Small black bug the size of a ladybird
How on earth are these helpful. Using the scientific names would at least make some sense …
