[tdwg-content] Occurrences, Organisms, and CollectionObjects: a review
tuco at berkeley.edu
Fri Sep 9 02:11:45 CEST 2011
Funny thing for all of you Darwin Core trivia buffs. In one iteration
of the class that became Occurrence, it was called "Sample"
was rejected as being too biased toward collections and away from
observations. With CollectionObjects, we no longer need to worry about
that sensitive issue. So, to me it seems Sample is no worse than
CollectionObject, but suffers the same shortcomings when it comes to
types of evidence that people wouldn't think of as samples (drawings,
digital media, written notes and literature).
But I applaud the proposal to reconcile with GSC's Sample. Are GSC
terms defined as vocabularies in a way that is compatible with Dublin
Core and Darwin Core? Can someone point to the normative document
containing the authoritative definition of the term?
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Gregor Hagedorn <g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com> wrote:
> I like sample. It is much more general and appropriate to work outside
> of museums. Preserving everthing is a luxury not all can afford. It
> should be done for many cases, but we usually don't have the resources
> to do it always.
More information about the tdwg-content