<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Reed Beaman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rbeaman@ufl.edu">rbeaman@ufl.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>We are not helping the data providers if we suggest that they publish in a way that is not usable, re-usable to downstream research. In fact, you/we are doing the data providers a disservice by suggesting that they do not need to do so.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I disagree for reasons set forth in the previous response to Peter DeVries.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div> If indeed we do, then the data brokers, whether GBIF, Manis, Ornis, Vertnet, etc, have the responsibility to ensure that the data can be transformed into standard reference systems. </div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree wholeheartedly.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>
Given the investment already made in these data improvement tools, I can't quite see why these rather simple geospatial transformations aren't extant.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree again. I could do it properly with two months of free time. Maybe this field season.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div> If we can't support the geo: namespace, then I'm starting to believe that we deserve the perception in various research/development communities that these data are not particularly useful. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Verbatim geo-temporal information is fine, and DWC is honest with this representation. Let's just make sure we accompany with standard reference systems resolved appropriately. If you have a a lat/long coordinate pair associated with an unknown datum and an uncertainty measure of your pleasure, then you can also represent it as some WGS84 based feature.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes. Lets. Just as we use appropriate terms from Dublin Core in Darwin Core, let's do so with geo:lat and geo:long for the sake of interoperability and rigorously correct semantics. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The next steps toward adoption are explained under section 3.4 of the Darwin Core Namespace Policy (<a href="http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/namespace/index.htm#classesofchanges">http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/namespace/index.htm#classesofchanges</a>). I hereby make a formal request of the Technical Architecture Group (TAG) to add these two terms to the Darwin Core documentation. I have added the recommendation to the Darwin Core issue tracker as Issue 82 (<a href="http://goo.gl/XhxM">http://goo.gl/XhxM</a>). It is now up to the TAG to pursue a public request for comments if the request is deemed to have merit.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div class="h5"><div><div>On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:47 AM, John Wieczorek wrote:</div>
<br><blockquote type="cite">The reason is simple, we want to help data publishers. It doesn't help data publishers if they can't publish what they have - it would mean there is no room for data improvement tools. That would be sad. Worse, most people haven't a clue what a datum is, or how it can ruin your whole day (or life, in at least one sad case of a crashed helicopter in Patagonia). Given this naiveté, people would simply put whatever geographic coordinates they have into geo:lat/lon and no one would have any way to know that they are incorrect.<div>
<br></div><div>Note that Darwin Core offers data publishers options to publish event information with year, month, day, startDayOfYear, endDayOfYear, and verbatimEventDate in addition to eventDate and eventTime - same philosophy.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Javier de la Torre <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jatorre@gmail.com" target="_blank">jatorre@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">I am not sure I understand why we can not set DWC fields to conform to WGS84 and then use what everybody else is using.<div><br></div><div>For example in eventDate DWC conforms to ISO 8601, why dont we do the same for location... it would allow to simplify it quite a lot and be more compliant with other standards-existing apps, etc.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Just an idea.</div><div><br><div> <span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div><span style="font-size:medium"><div><b><font color="#515151"><font size="3"><span style="font-size:11px">Javier de la Torre</span></font></font></b></div><div><font color="#8FC500"><b><font size="3"><span style="font-size:11px"><a href="http://www.vizzuality.com/" target="_blank">www.vizzuality.com</a></span></font></b></font></div>
</span></div></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></span> </div> <br><div><div><div></div><div><div>On Aug 9, 2010, at 4:13 PM, John Wieczorek wrote:</div><br></div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div>
</div><div>The partially good news is that if enough information (dwc:geodeticDatum) is given in a Darwin Core-based record, geo:lat/lon can be determined from it. More disturbing to me is that anyone would think geo:lat/lon alone is sufficient for any application, as it carries no notion of uncertainty and therefore fitness for use. Add dwc:coordinateUncertaintyInMeters (or even dwc:coordinatePrecision if you must) to the mix and I would be much happier.<div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:26 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Garry.Jolley-Rogers@csiro.au" target="_blank">Garry.Jolley-Rogers@csiro.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Jim,<br> Thanks. Had this aside to read in detail later. I think John is right... As same value with different constraints mean different interpretations are possible and seems to be the key thing. How are the values to be interpreted.<br>
<br> G<br> <div><br> -----Original Message-----<br> From: Jim Croft [mailto:<a href="mailto:jim.croft@gmail.com" target="_blank">jim.croft@gmail.com</a>]<br> </div><div>Sent: Monday, 9 August 2010 4:12 PM<br> To: Alexander, Paul (PI, Black Mountain); Harvey, Paul.W (PI, Black Mountain); Jolley-Rogers, Garry (PI, Black Mountain); Cawsey, Margaret (CES, Crace); Greg Whitbread<br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:tuco@berkeley.edu" target="_blank">tuco@berkeley.edu</a><br> </div><div><div></div><div>Subject: Fwd: [tdwg-tag] time and space namespaces in Darwin Core<br> <br> Did you catch this thread on tdwg-tag? It is an almost exact mirror<br>
of the conversations we have be having in the taxon profile space, but<br> involving the specimen locational data.<br> <br> >From John's comments it would appear he is not prepared to accept the<br> geo: and dwc: lat/long as 'exact match' because, although they are the<br>
same values, they have different constraints (or more precisely one<br> one has a constraint and one doesn't).<br> <br> I wouldn't have picked it but this looks like a case for 'closematch'.<br> <br> jim<br>
<br> <br> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br> From: John Wieczorek <<a href="mailto:tuco@berkeley.edu" target="_blank">tuco@berkeley.edu</a>><br> Date: Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:56 AM<br> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] time and space namespaces in Darwin Core<br>
To: joel sachs <<a href="mailto:jsachs@csee.umbc.edu" target="_blank">jsachs@csee.umbc.edu</a>><br> Cc: <a href="mailto:tdwg-bioblitz@googlegroups.com" target="_blank">tdwg-bioblitz@googlegroups.com</a>, <a href="mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org" target="_blank">tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org</a><br>
<br> <br> There is actually no equivalency between dwc:decimalLatitude and<br> geo:lat because geo:lat is specified to represent the latitude in the<br> WGS84 spatial reference system and dwc:decimalLatitude has no such<br>
such restriction.<br> <br> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:08 AM, joel sachs <<a href="mailto:jsachs@csee.umbc.edu" target="_blank">jsachs@csee.umbc.edu</a>> wrote:<br> ><br> > On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, Hilmar Lapp wrote:<br>
><br> > > Shouldn't the RDF for DwC link DwC:lat to geo:lat (using some subtype<br> > > or better yet equivalency relation)? And shouldn't hence Linked Data<br> > > browsers be able to use DwC:lat in the same way as geo:lat?<br>
> ><br> ><br> > Yes. But no Linked Data browser I'm aware of applies<br> > owl:equivalentProperty assetions before rendering the data. (In fact, most<br> > do no reasoning at all.) I agree that, whatever our default display,<br>
> it should include the appropriate mapping statements, either via an<br> > rdfs:seeAlso or similar link, or directly in the document.<br> ><br> ><br> > Joel.<br> ><br> ><br> > > -hilmar<br>
> ><br> > > On Aug 6, 2010, at 11:01 AM, joel sachs wrote:<br> > ><br> > >> All,<br> > >><br> > >> When representing observation records in RDF, there are advantages<br> > >> to using Dublin Core and Geo (<a href="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/" target="_blank">http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/</a><br>
> >> wgs84_pos#)<br> > >> namespaces where possible. For example, if we use DC:date, and<br> > >> geo:lat, geo:long, instead of DwC:eventDate, DwC:lat, and DwC:long,<br> > >> then Linked Data browsers can automatically map the records, plot<br>
> >> them on a timeline, etc.<br> > >><br> > >> My question is: What are the disadvantages to doing this? (For<br> > >> example, is this going to break someone's DwC validator?)<br>
> >><br> > >> Thanks -<br> > >> Joel.<br> > >><br> > ><br> > > --<br> > > ===========================================================<br> > > : Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- <a href="http://informatics.nescent.org/" target="_blank">informatics.nescent.org</a> :<br>
> > ===========================================================<br> > ><br> <br> _________________<br> Jim Croft ~ <a href="mailto:jim.croft@gmail.com" target="_blank">jim.croft@gmail.com</a> ~ +61-2-62509499 ~<br>
<a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft</a><br> 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point<br> of doubtful sanity.'<br>
- Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)<br> <br> Please send URIs, not attachments:<br> <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html" target="_blank">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div> _______________________________________________<br>tdwg-tag mailing list<div><br><a href="mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org" target="_blank">tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org</a><br>
</div><div><a href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag" target="_blank">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</a><br> </div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div> _______________________________________________<br>
tdwg-tag mailing list<br><a href="mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org" target="_blank">tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag" target="_blank">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>