[tdwg-content] Conflict between DarwinCore and DublinCore usageof dcterms:type / basisOfRecord
g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com
Sun Oct 25 19:50:12 CET 2009
2009/10/25 John R. WIECZOREK <tuco at berkeley.edu>:
> Can you explain the difference between your new term dwc:subtype and
> the term dwc:basisOfRecord most recently proposed in this thread?
> I see no difference bewteen your dwc:subtype and the proposed
> dwc:basisOfRecord except the name. The term basisOfRecord has been
> used for this purpose in Darwin Core since 13 Jun 2003. I think
> precedence should prevail.
Please see my slight preference for the word "subtype" over
"basisOfRecord" as a secondary question.
The essence is that I propose to use DublinCore (precendence since
1995 and extremely widely adapted) where it applies.
basisOfRecord is a mixture of DublinCore type terms, and subtypes of
DublinCore terms. In the latter case DwC omits the applicable
DublinCore resource type vocabulary.
Thus any DC-aware consumer of the data has to do both a mapping of
dwc:StillImage to http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage and imply
that the resource quoted throuh PreservedSpecimen, FossilSpecimen,
LivingSpecimen is a http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/PhysicalObject, that a
HumanObservation or MachineObservation must be
http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Event, and NomenclaturalChecklist a
>> Thus, while I think recordType is a DarwinCore categorization of
>> intent, not resource, and is fine, I still feel that the basisOfRecord
>> vocabulary is a subtyping of resource types.
>> I therefore believe that it would make life simpler for many consumers
>> of DwC if DwC would adopt DublinCore type for its own purposes.
>> Instead of having basisOfRecord =
>> DarwinCore would first use the DublinCore vocabulary: dcterms:type=
>> PhysicalObject /ADDED, forgotten in previous mail
>> and then use dwc:subtype=
>> for those subtypes of dcterms:type that DarwinCore cares about to
>> specify further. This would allow consumers to directly map DwC
>> records into their DublinCore metadata, rather than analysing the
>> implied hierarchy and mapping in the flattened basisOfRecord.
More information about the tdwg-content