Batch Edit Validation Improvements

[bronwyncombs]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

From Paul Bucci via discourse comment

Hi folks, love the batch edit feature! One nit, it looks like it’s currently a hard requirement to validate after a batch edit before committing. Once the errors are fixed, it requires a full re-validation before upload, which means that it’s double-checking already-validated fields as well as the newly fixed errors. On the other hand, the workbench allows uploads without re-validation.

Describe the solution you'd like

My suggestions are:
Re-validation should only be applied to edited fields (saves a lot of processing time)
Workbench and batch edit should operate in the same way to unify user experience
Many thanks! Already a helpful feature 🙂
—Paul

Reported By
University of British Columbia

Additional context

From Vinny via #5417 (comment)

we need a more nuanced way to compare old and new values.

Correct, but we already do (for API)! See

specify7/specifyweb/specify/api.py

Lines 536 to 544 in 1b2ab81

	def fld_change_info(obj, field, val) -> Optional[FieldChangeInfo]:
	if field.name != 'timestampmodified':
	value = prepare_value(field, val)
	if isinstance(field, FloatField) or isinstance(field, DecimalField):
	value = None if value is None else float(value)
	old_value = getattr(obj, field.name)
	if str(old_value) != str(value): # ugh
	return FieldChangeInfo(field_name=field.name, old_value=old_value, new_value=value)
	return None

Should just be a mechanical change to use it here. Also,

specify7/specifyweb/specify/api.py

Line 961 in 1b2ab81

if isinstance(field, DateTimeField) and isinstance(val, str):

branch is irrelevant to us (trace out why)

Also linked in the relevant PR:
4814f11

[specifysoftware]

This issue has been mentioned on Specify Community Forum. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.specifysoftware.org/t/batch-editing-for-specify-7/847/17