- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
In the SCiO lab, scrubbing the data would be easier with a bulk delete. Using filters to narrow down a sample or multiple selection bulk delete would be nice.
Thanks redwingii!
I forwarded your request to our development team who meet regularly to prioritize new features on our roadmap.
In the SCiO lab, scrubbing the data would be easier with a bulk delete. Using filters to narrow down a sample or multiple selection bulk delete would be nice.
<br>
Yes I support this proposal.
Longer term you might like to think about other housekeeping tools, like “search and replace” for both text and List values.
As we learn, we will want to improve and correct classifications. Doing them one by one will be hard later when we have some hundreds of scans.
RogerI have been researching … Ok, some would say Im just playing around, but work can be fun…
Anyway. I have come up with a few LOW PRIORITY little click hogs that you might want to think about updating.
1) When your in SCiO Lab looking at a spectrum and decide to do a model of it and click on create model, it works just fine, but when you return to the spectrum it resets the “Group By”. Its kinda a pain when looking at what the possible models might be for a group, I keep forgetting to change the group by when making a series of models.
2) When there is a Known .vs. Estimated model displayed, it would be really nice if you could click on a data point and go to the record.
3) When an attribute of list type custom is made while defining the model, you can rearrange the order of the way the list is presented, but when a model is made, it shows it in the order the custom list entries were made.
Im a software engineer by trade so I tend to catch obscure things that have NOTHING to do with the functionality. I completely understand, when this is presented to the project leader they will laugh because there are 100 more important things to do than add bells and whistles to the web application…
KEEP UP THE EXCELLENT WORK….
I have verified the marker I was pretty sure was there to the wavelengths 825nm and 925nm. I tried downloading the model data and removing the data in this range, but I found out I am not quite that smart yet.
A way to use a specific range of wavelengths to give more “weight” to the equation would be REALLY nice.
Actually, as I thought about it, I am really trying to exclude a range of wavelengths as much as I am trying to make a wavelength range more important…
I picture a filter that can take the spectrum and make area’s of smaller data changes less important and the real differences magnified.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.