[tdwg-content] Conflict between DarwinCore and DublinCore usage of dcterms:type / basisOfRecord

[Steve Baskauf]

In a similar vein as Bob mentioned (below), I would like to see how this 
proposal would be applied to the specific case where images taken 
directly of living organisms are used to document occurrences (my 
original issue posted on the MRTG wiki, 
http://www.keytonature.eu/wiki/MRTGv08_Type_term_inconsistent_with_DwC).  
I  routinely collect this kind of image and have made the case that live 
organism images can and should be used in the same way as physical 
specimens to document occurrences 
(http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/plantbiology/ncsc/vulpia/pdf/Baskauf_&_Kirchoff_Digital_Plant_Images.pdf).  
Thus as occurrence records, the metadata for such images should be in 
conformity with DwC as well as the media-specific MRTG schema. 

In the example of a live plant image from 
http://www.cas.vanderbilt.edu/bioimages/species/frame/oslo.htm I would 
assign image record
/DwC:recordClass/ = Occurrence
/DwC:basisOfRecord/ = StillImage
/dcterms:type/ = StillImage
/mrtg:subtype/ = Photograph
[Note that DwC:basisOfRecord is not synonymous with mrtg:subtype as it 
currently stands.  Would it have to be under John's proposal?]

In the example of an image of an herbarium sheet shown at 
http://www.morphbank.net/Show/?pop=Yes&id=142009 I would assign the 
record for the herbarium sheet itself:
/DwC:recordClass/ = Occurrence
/DwC:basisOfRecord/ = PreservedSpecimen
/dcterms:type/ = PhysicalObject

and for the record of the specimen image:
/DwC:recordClass/ = Occurrence
/DwC:basisOfRecord/ = StillImage
/dcterms:type/ = StillImage
/mrtg:subtype/ = Photograph

Is this the idea?  Again, I note that it is not particularly useful in 
this situation to consider /basisOfRecord/ a subtype of /dcterms:type/ 
as they have the same value for the images.

Steve Baskauf


Bob Morris wrote:
> For any proposed solutions, I'd like to see a few use cases, e.g.,
> examples of biodiversity multimedia resources, and how the proposals
> play out for them.  For MRTG's concerns, my favorites are:
>
> * http://bit.ly/AudubonOspreyDescription  an original Audubon
> manuscript describing the Osprey in the  Audubon Osprey drawing
> * http://bit.ly/AudubonOspreyPrint an original of the Audubon Osprey
> print, for sale at a gallery, or as in a stable Collection
> * http://bit.ly/AudubonOspreyDigitalImage  N.Y. Public Library Digital
> Image of Audubon Osprey print.
> * http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikebaird/324182767/  a cc licensed
> picture on Flickr of an Osprey,  georeferenced to named location.
>
>
> --Bob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 4:20 PM, John R. WIECZOREK <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>   
>> Gregor,
>>
>> That sounds like a good solution to all of the problems. I would
>> propose that the basisOfRecord IS the the same thing as your proposed
>> dwc:subtype, so we should keep basisOfRecord.
>>
>> Net solution:
>>
>> 1) keep dcterms:type
>> 2) use DCType vocabulary to control dcterms:type (so, StillImage,
>> PhysicalObject, Event, etc.)
>> 3) keep basisOfRecord
>> 4) use our DwC-specific subtypes (PreservedSpecimen, FossilSpecimen,
>> HumanObservation, etc.) as the controlled vocabulary for basisOfRecord
>> without a formal type vocabulary (very close to how it is now, just
>> some of the terms would go to dcterms:type).
>> 5) add a recordClass term
>> 6) use the DwCType vocabulary to control the recordClass term instead
>> of the dcterms:type term.
>>
>> This solutions fixes the Dublin Core - Darwin Core controlled
>> vocabulary problem, retains all existing terms, isolates the
>> controlled vocabulary that is specific to our domain, making it very
>> easy to expand without changes to the standard.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Gregor Hagedorn
>> <g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>>> How about we retain basisOfRecord, but have it refine dcterms:type,
>>>> drop dcterms:type and add a "recordClass" term in its place that is
>>>> governed exactly as dcterms:type is currently being used in the
>>>> recently ratified version of the Core?
>>>>         
>>> recordClass for Taxon/Occurrence/Event sounds good.
>>>
>>> I am less sure about keeping the "perspective-dependent"
>>> basisOfRecord-term in a place where dcterms:type. The dcterms:type
>>> vocabulary is, in principle, extensible, and meant to be extended.
>>> Except, of course, some specific xml-implementation of dublin core
>>> prevent this... To avoid problems with this one might desire to have
>>> only the strict resource type vocabulary in dcterms:type. Then this
>>> could by PhysicalObject/Event and a dwc:subtype added to express
>>> PreservedSpecimen/MachineObservation etc. Essentially, MRTG intends to
>>> use such a mrtg:subtype as well to differentiate different StillImage
>>> or Text subtypes:
>>>  http://www.keytonature.eu/wiki/MRTG_Schema_v0.8#Subtype
>>>
>>> This would then mean, DarwinCore might support:
>>>  dwc:recordClass
>>>  dcterms:type
>>>  dwc:subtype
>>>
>>> Gregor
>>>
>>>       
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences

postal mail address:
VU Station B 351634
Nashville, TN  37235-1634,  U.S.A.

delivery address:
2125 Stevenson Center
1161 21st Ave., S.
Nashville, TN 37235

office: 2128 Stevenson Center
phone: (615) 343-4582,  fax: (615) 343-6707
http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20091024/b7c9823c/attachment.html