[tdwg-content] Fwd: BasisOfrecord flavors; which one to choose

John R. WIECZOREK tuco at berkeley.edu
Tue Feb 9 18:09:38 CET 2010


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Francisco Pando <pando at gbif.es>
Date: Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:57 AM
Subject: RE: BasisOfrecord flavors; which one to choose
To: "John R. WIECZOREK" <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Cc: "dremsen at gbif.org" <dremsen at gbif.org>

Hi John,

Thanks a lot, I have a clearer picture now. Please go ahead  and post
whatever you think could be useful of this on TDWG-Content.

All the best,

Paco

Francisco Pando

Responsable

GBIF.ES, Unidad de Coordinación            Tel.+34 91 420 3017 x 274

Real Jardín Botánico - CSIC                Fax +34 91 429 2405

Plaza de Murillo, 2                        pando at gbif.es

28014 Madrid, Spain                        www.gbif.es



*From:* gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] *On
Behalf Of *John
R. WIECZOREK
*Sent:* martes, 09 de febrero de 2010 17:25
*To:* Francisco Pando
*Cc:* dremsen at gbif.org
*Subject:* Re: BasisOfrecord flavors; which one to choose



Hi Paco,

The only difference between the first list (
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm) and the third list (
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/DwCTypeVocabulary) is the Event
term. Actually I believe that the Event term shouldn't be on the first list,
because it is a Dublin Core term and already a controlled vocabulary term
for dcterms:type. I think you should go under that assumption. In any case,
I doubt that people will want to share biodiversity records that are Events
that are not one of the subtypes of Events on the third list. I updated the
Google Code wiki page to be more explicit that the Event and PhysicalObject
terms come from Dublin Core.

There has been some discussion on the tdwg-content list about other possible
basisOfRecord vocabulary to try to better distinguish digital media. The
original argument for this is captured in an Issue on the Darwin Core Google
Code site at http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=68. This
is a good example of how the type vocabulary might be expanded to cover new
cases.

I don't know what to tell you about the GBIF vocabulary except that it was
devised in April of last year before the type vocabularies for Darwin Core
reached their current state of maturity.

As this discussion may be useful to others, I'd like to request that you
post it to tdwg-content as well, or give me permission to do so.

Hope that helps,

John

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Francisco Pando <pando at gbif.es> wrote:

Dear David, dear John,

We are in the process of updating some of our software to make it compliant
with the approved DwC standard. We decided to start on something we thought
it was easy, BasisOfrecord. However we found:



http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm



"The Type Vocabulary is a recommended set of values to use for the
basisOfRecord term to categorize Darwin Core resources."



*Vocabulary for basisOfRecord*

Occurrence<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#Occurrence>



 Event <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#Event>



 Location <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#Location>



 Taxon <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#Taxon>



 PreservedSpecimen<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#PreservedSpecimen>



 FossilSpecimen<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#FossilSpecimen>



 LivingSpecimen<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#LivingSpecimen>



 HumanObservation<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#HumanObservation>



 MachineObservation<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#MachineObservation>



 NomenclaturalChecklist<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#NomenclaturalChecklist>



Date Modified:         2009-12-07

http://vocabularies.gbif.org/vocabularies/basis_of_record



Concepts in the *basisOfRecord* vocabulary



FossilSpecimen <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/FossilSpecimen>

HumanObservation<http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/HumanObservation>

LivingSpecimen <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/LivingSpecimen>

MachineObservation<http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/MachineObservation>

MovingImage <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/MovingImage>

NomenclaturalAct<http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/NomenclaturalAct>

PreservedSpecimen<http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/PreservedSpecimen>

StillImage <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/StillImage>

TaxonDistribution<http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/TaxonDistribution>

TaxonName <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/TaxonName>

TaxonNameUsage <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/basis_of_record/TaxonNameUsage>

Submitted by admin <http://vocabularies.gbif.org/users/admin> on Tue,
2009-04-21 23:34





http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/DwCTypeVocabulary



The Type Vocabulary used in Darwin Core consists of two parts, vocabulary to
describe the record in terms consistent with the Dublin Core Type vocabulary
(using the dcterms:type term) and vocabulary to describe the specific
biodiversity-related content for a record (using the basisOfRecord term).



The list of valid values for the basisOfRecord include:

*Term*

*Subtype of*

Occurrence

Event

PreservedSpecimen

PhysicalObject

FossilSpecimen

PhysicalObject

LivingSpecimen

PhysicalObject

HumanObservation

Event

MachineObservation

Event

Taxon



Location



NomenclaturalChecklist





Updated Jan 17, 2010 by gtuco.btuco





I seems safer to go for the Google Code option, but shouldn’t the three
sources be coherent?



Best wishes,



Paco





Francisco Pando



Responsable

GBIF.ES, Unidad de Coordinación            Tel.+34 91 420 3017 x 274

Real Jardín Botánico - CSIC                Fax +34 91 429 2405

Plaza de Murillo, 2                        pando at gbif.es

28014 Madrid, Spain                        www.gbif.es
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20100209/8b823f60/attachment.html 


More information about the tdwg-content mailing list