[tdwg-tapir] Tapir protocol - Harvest methods?

Wed Apr 30 10:18:52 CEST 2008

Phil,
having said that GBIF is happy both with DiGIR and TAPIR I still  
wanted to raise one important issue: The DiGIR PHP code is rather old  
now and is not being maintained anymore by anyone. I had problems  
myself getting it running with PHP5, whereas TapirLink installed in 2  
minutes without any problem. So for new provider installations GBIF  
definitely recommends to use TAPIR over DiGIR.

Markus

On 29 Apr, 2008, at 24:34, Markus Döring wrote:

> Phil,
> from the GBIF side it doesnt matter whether you use DiGIR or TAPIR.  
> Both protocols are currently supported by the GBIF indexer.
> If you use TapirLink simply mapping to DarwinCore is enough. For  
> other TAPIRlite providers please make sure your service works with  
> the 2 following DarwinCore TAPIR templates found at TDWG:
>
> http://rs.tdwg.org/tapir/cs/dwc/1.4/template/dwc_sci_name_range.xml
> http://rs.tdwg.org/tapir/cs/dwc/1.4/template/dwc_unfiltered_search.xml
>
> At GBIF we are currently also thinking about a much simpler provider  
> software tailored for harvesting. That will reduce load on providers  
> enormously while still supporting basic TAPIR capabilities for true  
> distributed queries. We will keep this list informed once we have  
> thought this through.
>
> Markus
>
> --
> Markus Döring, Berlin
> Senior Software Developer
> GBIF Secretariat
> mdoering at gbif.org
>
>
>
>
> On 28 Apr, 2008, at 23:02, Blum, Stan wrote:
>
>> Phil,
>>
>> TAPIR was intended to be a unification of DiGIR and BioCASE. There  
>> are a few
>> implementations of providers but fewer instances of portals built  
>> on TAPIR.
>> Networks built on DiGIR may eventually switch to TAPIR, but that  
>> remains to
>> be seen.  DiGIR and BioCASE were designed for distributed queries,  
>> not really
>> harvesting.  I understand harvesting can be done more simply and  
>> efficiently
>> by other approaches, such as OAI-PMH.  If the sensibilities of data  
>> providers
>> evolves to accept and allow harvesting (which seems likely), we may  
>> see
>> "networks" built on that architecture, instead of distributed  
>> queries.
>>
>> If your only goal is to provide data to GBIF, I would suggest  
>> installing
>> TAPIR (unless Tim Robertson tells you something else).  If you are  
>> concerned
>> about providing data to other networks, like www.SERNEC.org, you'll  
>> need a
>> DiGIR provider, too.  (Such is the nature of technical transition.)
>>
>> -Stan
>>
>> Stanley D. Blum, Ph.D.
>> Research Information Manager
>> California Academy of Sciences
>> 875 Howard St.
>> San Francisco,  CA
>> +1 (415) 321-8183
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
>> [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Phil Cryer
>> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 1:22 PM
>> To: Renato De Giovanni; tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
>> Subject: RE: [tdwg-tapir] Tapir protocol - Harvest methods?
>>
>>
>> So we have DiGIR running at Mobot for Tropicos data, and clients  
>> hit it to
>> harvest data.  I was just wondering if people are still deploying  
>> DiGIR at
>> all, or are they just using Tapir by default?  It seems to have  
>> taken over
>> for DiGIR, and I want to know if that's a 'standard' that we should  
>> follow.
>>
>> For testing, yes, we're talking more of performance; make sure our  
>> network
>> and server will handle X load.  So I guess I want to know more of,  
>> how do
>> clients attach to a Tapir server, how do they pull the data from us?
>>
>> Sorry if this is such a newbie question, but I can't understand  
>> this aspect
>> from the docs I've read.
>>
>> Thanks for the reply!
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
>> [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Renato De  
>> Giovanni
>> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 1:54 PM
>> To: tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tapir] Tapir protocol - Harvest methods?
>>
>> Phil,
>>
>> Is the "DiGIR implementation that you want to move away from" just a
>> DiGIR service? Or is it something else?
>>
>> I would only keep a parallel DiGIR service if there are older clients
>> that can only talk to it and for some reason (time/resources) can't
>> be updated. I'm not sure if this is your case.
>>
>> Also, when you said that you want to "test your implementation", did
>> you mean that you want to test a TAPIR service, or is it some other
>> application based on TAPIR? If you just want to test a TAPIR service,
>> you could simply run TapirTester on it instead of developing your own
>> harvester:
>>
>> http://tapir.tdwg.org/tester/
>>
>> Note: If necessary, the existing tests can be improved. New ones can
>> also be created (TapirTester is open source).
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>> --
>> Renato
>>
>> On 28 Apr 2008 at 10:39, Phil Cryer wrote:
>>>
>>> Just starting with Tapir/DiGIR - I have 2 questions:
>>>
>>> * I would like to know if the Tapir protocol is the preferred method
>>> over DiGIR. We have a DiGIR implementation that we want to move away
>>> from, and bring up a Tapir one in its place. Is this normal, or do
>>> organizations run both to facilitate their older clients to do
>>> harvesting?
>>>
>>> * What is a method to harvest data from Tapir, and/or DiGIR -we want
>>> to do this internally to test our implementation before we open up  
>>> to
>>> the world, how can I do this (we run Windows and Linux as clients)
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Phil
>>> --
>>> Phil Cryer
>>> Open Source Development
>>> Missouri Botanical Garden
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-tapir mailing list
>> tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-tapir mailing list
>> tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-tapir mailing list
>> tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir
>>
>
>
>
>