Soil Tests: Types of Workflows

[knelson-farmbeltnorth]

In our discussions to date, we've talked of several types of workflows. There appears to be variety in how different companies do business. Do the below 3 categories encompass foreseeable scenarios, acknowledging that in some cases one party may handle multiple of the below?

1. Request to an agronomic advisor to run tests on one or more fields.
   a. Are the tests always defined or are there cases where the requester leaves it to his advisor/local convention on what analytes will be tested.
   b. Similarly, who may define grid vs. zone testing?
   c. Conceivably the requesting party may also provide predefined zones?

2. Request to a specialist contractor to pull samples.
   a. Are points always defined before the sampler goes to the field, or are there cases where the sampler defines them in the field?

3. Request to a lab to run tests. See Soil Tests: Defining the Requested Tests #150

[knelson-farmbeltnorth]

General agreement in 28 August 2024 meeting that these are the different types of requests and that we do want to continue to pursue flexible modeling of any/all of the above. Re the questions above, while individual participants may have consistent workflows/options, no scenario above can be ruled out.

[knelson-farmbeltnorth]

Expanding on request to test/pull samples for discussion.

- Any party (grower/advisor) may request of another party (1st advisor/additional advisor).
- The receiving party may fulfill the submission through to a testing lab, or may themselves make a more detailed request of a third party to pull samples.
- Requestor may provide any of
    - No detail (with an common understanding between parties on where samples are collected and what tests are conventionally run)
    - Desired sampling methodology (zone vs. grid, single vs. composite, depths)
    - Pre-produced zone map or grid points
    - Desired parameters for generating a zone map or grid points
    - Reference a known test package at a known lab
    - Reference to specific analytes desired
    - Reference to both specific analytes and test methodologies
    - Completed bag labels for submission to the lab
    - Valid date range for sampling

We could model the Work Order to allow for any amount of detail, with subsequent parties filling in additional detail until the request to the lab. Supplying pre-supplied bag labels would be problematic in ADAPT as it exists today, however. We don't have a construct for an open-ended binary file. Is there ever a case where one party would make a request to another party to pull samples and provide the bag labels electronically, or is the party that generates the labels invariably the one that interfaces with the lab?

When the process is completed, there would a work record with results, and there could optionally be a zone map or specific points recorded for future sampling. Is there any other result?

[strhea]

That seems like a reasonably complete list. I can see using a prescription construct to deal with some of this. I THINK we preserved support of both manual and spatial prescriptions.

A question: How are these workflows scoped? To the field? If I want to do the same thing to 1..n fields, does that mean I iterate the workflow 1..n times?

[knelson-farmbeltnorth]

Agreement in 4 September 2024 meeting that every work order will be scoped to a field, with repetition as necessary.

[knelson-farmbeltnorth]

Soil test / Modus Schema v2 work parked pending AgGateway working groups.