[tdwg-content] New Term Request - typifiedName

Richard Pyle deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Thu Dec 5 00:00:12 CET 2013


So, if I understand the context properly from John's point below,
"typifiedName" would be effectively redundant to typeStatus within the
context of an instance of dec:Identification; with the former used in "flat"
cases where the basis of record is an Occurrence/Specimen; and the latter
would be used (in conjunction with typeStatus) in cases when data are
provided in more structured form.

I guess I don't have any problem with this (there are other redundancies
within DwC, such as the higher rank taxon name fields and
higherClassification within the Taxon class).

But I still think there would need to be some guidance on how to deal with
cases where a single specimen might have multiple type designations (and
multiple typeStatus values, as is the case in the two examples I sent
earlier).  Note that the definition of typeStatus already accommodates
multiple values:
"A list (concatenated and separated) of nomenclatural types (type status,
typified scientific name, publication) applied to the subject."

Perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to define typifiedName in the same
way.

Aloha,
Rich


> -----Original Message-----
> From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf
> Of John Wieczorek
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:04 AM
> To: Chuck Miller
> Cc: Eades, David Cluthe; Markus Döring; Richard Pyle; TDWG Content Mailing
> List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] New Term Request - typifiedName
> 
> ...and if so, could the Darwin Core Identification History extension
> (http://tools.gbif.org/dwca-
> validator/extension.do?id=http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Identification)
> be an appropriate and sufficient mechanism to share multiple type
> designation?
> 
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
> wrote:
> > Nomenclaturally, there are certainly specimens that are the type for
> multiple names.  And there are specimens that may be physically annotated
> with multiple type names on them.
> >
> > But, I think for Markus' purposes, the issue is whether  there are
examples
> of a specimen data exchange record that includes multiple values for
> typifiedName.  Is there anyone who is or needs to include multiple
> typifiedNames in their specimen data exchange records, particularly with
> GBIF?
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Eades, David
> > Cluthe
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:49 AM
> > To: Markus Döring; Richard Pyle
> > Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] New Term Request - typifiedName
> >
> > The Orthoptera Species File contains many examples of one specimen as
> type for multiple names.  One example:
> > Burmeister, 1838 designated a specimen a syntype of Xiphidium
> glaberrimum.
> > Vickery & Johnstone, 1974 designated the same specimen as lectotype of
> Xiphidum glaberrimum and as neotype of Orchelimum cuticulare Serville
> 1838.  This was done to settle any ambiguity about the synonymy.
> >
> > David Eades
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Markus
> > Döring
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:09 AM
> > To: Richard Pyle
> > Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] New Term Request - typifiedName
> >
> > Rich, do you have examples of a specimen being the (current) type of
> multiple names?
> > I was looking for these but could not find any. As the GBIF data coming
in is
> flat we obviously only see simple cases and I'd be interested to study the
> more complex ones.
> >
> > Markus
> >
> >
> > On 04 Dec 2013, at 11:51, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hmmm.....
> >>
> >> This is the reason that typeStatus was included in the Identification
> >> class
> >> -- so that it always is associated with both a specimen (manifest as
> >> an occurrence), and to a taxon (name) -- to which the specimen is
> Identified.
> >> This is in keeping with what the concept of a "type specimen" really
> >> is -- that is, a specimen is not a type inherently, but rather a
> >> specimen is
> >> *designated* as a type by someone at some time, via an Identification
> >> instance.
> >>
> >> Of course, because DwC classes are not really intended to be used in
> >> an ontological sense, and because most Museums put their "typeStatus"
> >> field in their specimen table (rather than in an Identification
> >> table), I can certainly understand the need for this proposed new term.
> >>
> >> I guess my main concern/question is:  how to deal with specimens that
> >> represent types of more than one name? (not common, but not
> >> necessarily an Edge-case either)
> >>
> >> Aloha,
> >> Rich
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-content-
> >>> bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of John Wieczorek
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 4:13 AM
> >>> To: TDWG Content Mailing List
> >>> Subject: [tdwg-content] New Term Request - typifiedName
> >>>
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> This message is to open public commentary on a request for a new
> >>> term, typifiedName, submitted by Markus Döring to the Darwin Core
> >>> issue tracker at
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=197.
> >>> The justification given for inclusion of the term is:
> >>>
> >>> "Clear separation of the type status and the typified scientific
> >>> name that
> >> is
> >>> typified by a type specimen, the subject. Looking at how
> >>> dwc:typeStatus
> >> has
> >>> been used in all of GBIFs specimen data one can see there is the
> >>> need to express this, but it should better be handled with a term on
> >>> its own and leave typeStatus for the status of the type only. The
> >>> term name itself is
> >> also
> >>> used by ABCD:
> >>> http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/ABCD/AbcdConcept0603."
> >>>
> >>> The proposal is as follows:
> >>>
> >>> Definition:
> >>> The scientific name that is based on the type specimen.
> >>>
> >>> Comment:
> >>> It is recommended to also indicate the typeStatus of the specimen.
> >>>
> >>> Refines:
> >>>
> >>> Has Domain:
> >>>
> >>> Has Range:
> >>>
> >>> Replaces:
> >>>
> >>> ABCD 2.06:
> >>>
> DataSets/DataSet/Units/Unit/SpecimenUnit/NomenclaturalTypeDesignatio
> >>> n s/NomenclaturalTypeDesignation/TypifiedName
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> tdwg-content mailing list
> >>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> >>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tdwg-content mailing list
> >> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content



More information about the tdwg-content mailing list