<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma}
@font-face
{font-family:Monaco}
@font-face
{font-family:"\.HelveticaNeueUI"}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline}
p
{margin-right:0cm;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"}
span.BalloonTextChar
{font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"}
span.apple-tab-span
{}
span.apple-style-span
{}
span.EmailStyle23
{font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D}
span.EmailStyle24
{font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D}
span.EmailStyle25
{font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt}
div.WordSection1
{}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-NZ" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">We have used TCS for several projects, TDWG LSID vocabs (ontology) for some and Darwin Core taxon terms for another.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Eg.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Global Compositae Checklist uses a variation on TCS (as we need to provide “provider data” with the generated consensus checklist data).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">The web service return this TCS variant, eg</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dixon.iplantcollaborative.org/CompositaeWebService/TICAChecklistService.asmx/GetTICANameRecordTCS?ticaLSID=urn:lsid:compositae.org:names:0002DB31-87CD-4FC0-8852-7A16080F00BA">http://dixon.iplantcollaborative.org/CompositaeWebService/TICAChecklistService.asmx/GetTICANameRecordTCS?ticaLSID=urn:lsid:compositae.org:names:0002DB31-87CD-4FC0-8852-7A16080F00BA</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">TCS works very well for handling taxon names and concepts in their fuller form. Our biggest issue using TCS was data providers not being able to actually
give this structured data – it was often just NameId, FullName, ParentNameId, AcceptedNameId data.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">I also agree with Rod that RDF is probably a better way to go, so the TDWG LSID vocabs (ontology),
</span><a href="http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/TAG/LsidVocs">http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/TAG/LsidVocs</a>,<span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> are good for – ie the equivalent of the fuller TCS XML
but in RDF from.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">We have used these vocabs for most LSID resolver that resolve names:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">our names at Landcare, eg
</span><a href="http://lsid.landcareresearch.co.nz/authority/metadata/?lsid=urn:lsid:landcareresearch.co.nz:names:3BF47627-12C1-4091-A55D-5D004D97ABF6">http://lsid.landcareresearch.co.nz/authority/metadata/?lsid=urn:lsid:landcareresearch.co.nz:names:3BF47627-12C1-4091-A55D-5D004D97ABF6</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Index Fungorum names, eg urn:lsid:indexfungorum.org:names:213645 (currently broken, but on the move to a new server)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Recently, with the NZOR project (<a href="http://www.nzor.org)">www.nzor.org)</a> we have delivered our names dataset to GBIF using the Taxon terms of Darwin
Core, in the Darwin Core Archive format. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">This brought up several issues. Firstly, we still don’t seem to have sorted out what actually constitutes a taxon concept, and what to apply the ID for the
concept to. This is evident from the conflation of the name and concept terms in DwC. I think the Darwin-SW stuff Steve mention is a good step towards sorting this out, but it really needs some clarification, especially when applying it in a practical sense,
eg as a DwC-A. Other issues where around the flattened nature of DwC and the struggle to get concept data into it.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">I agree with Rich that all this stuff needs sorting out and we need to define a way forward – which standards should be recommended for use, etc.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">This also overlaps with the TAG work and there has been some talk of a TAG workshop that may be a good place to look at these issues. Eg, if we had a core,
technology independent model that all standards could map to, then the standards would be more like applicability statements, best practices etc for particular use cases. There shouldn’t really be any issue with have multiple taxon oriented standards (as
there are many use cases that vary slightly), but at least they should all map together and be consistent in some way.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Kevin</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Richard Pyle<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, 2 November 2012 2:13 p.m.<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Roderic Page'; Tony.Rees@csiro.au<br>
<b>Cc:</b> pmurray@anbg.gov.au; tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org; Simon.Pigot@csiro.au<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [tdwg-tag] Any TCS users with experiences to report?</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">As the Convenor of the TDWG Taxon Names and Concept group, I have failed in one of my core duties to address this issue. My inability to attend
TDWG this year has only exacerbated this problem.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Having said that….. I have had many discussions with many folks over the past couple of years on this issue, and for various reasons the time
is now ripe to re-visit this age-old problem and make some decisions about how to move forward.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">For the ZooBank LSID resolver, we used Roger’s vocabularies; and to some extent, the DwC terms harmonize (but not completely). A few years ago
I made a push to either revitalize TCS (e.g., through TCS 2.0), or to allow it to retire (if it hasn’t already done so de facto).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Having just emerged from nearly two very thick years of development on ZooBank, GNA/GNUB, etc., I am now more energized (and liberated, in terms
of available time) to re-focus on how to move forward. My hope is that we can make some core decisions about how to move forward well before next year’s TDWG meeting.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">I would very-much welcome feedback from people on:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"><span style="">1)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Who is actively using TCS? Does it work? Can it be improved? Should it be retired?</span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"><span style="">2)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Who is using Roger’s vocabulary? Does it work? Can it be improved?
</span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"><span style="">3)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">How much of DwC:Taxon is in active use? Just the “traditional” terms; or some of the new ones introduced with the ratified DwC? Does it work?
Can it be improved? </span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"><span style="">4)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">What other standards are being used in this space?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Now that we have launched the new ZooBank, we will turn our attention to GNUB services that will start to put that content to work. It is therefore
very much in our interest to support the sorts of data exchange mechanisms that people most need and, ideally, collapse the various “flavors” into something we can all rally around.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Aloha,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Rich</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Richard L. Pyle, PhD<br>
Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences<br>
Associate Zoologist in Ichthyology<br>
Dive Safety Officer<br>
Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum<br>
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817<br>
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252<br>
email: <a href="mailto:deepreef@bishopmuseum.org">deepreef@bishopmuseum.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html">http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Note: This disclaimer formally apologizes for the disclaimer below, over which I have no control.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div style="border:none; border-left:solid blue 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Roderic Page<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <Tony.Rees@csiro.au><br>
<b>Cc:</b> pmurray@anbg.gov.au; <tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org>; Simon.Pigot@csiro.au<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [tdwg-tag] Any TCS users with experiences to report?</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">A TDWG standard not actually being used, surely not ;)</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Leaving aside the wisdom of XML schema (yuck) and developing standards independently of actual products, it does puzzle me that the work Roger Hyam did on the LSID vocabularies is consistently overlooked. The is a RDF
version of TCS <br>
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif""><a href="http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/TaxonConcept">http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/TaxonConcept</a> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif"">This was used by CoL in their LSIDs, but because they usually broke I suspect nobody used them.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif"">We seem to be in a muddled state at present where there are competing vocabularies in use for taxonomic names and concepts, and these two notions are often
not cleanly separated. Whereas nomenclators such as IPNI and Zoobank use the LSID taxon name vocabulary, other databases use vocabularies such as Darwin Core, which rather conflate names and concepts. It's not clear to me how this situation arose, but it
somewhat defeats the point of having standards.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif"">Regards,</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif"">Rod</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.5pt; font-family:".HelveticaNeueUI","serif""><br>
</span><span lang="EN-US">Sent from my iPhone</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
On 1 Nov 2012, at 22:41, <<a href="mailto:Tony.Rees@csiro.au">Tony.Rees@csiro.au</a>> wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt; margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Hi TDWG persons,</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">I am involved in an activity here to set a local standard for storing taxonomic name, identifier and (probably) hierarchy information in metadata
records using our profile of ISO 19115 for the latter, and the question will come up as to whether to use elements from TCS, DwC, EML, NCBII extension to ISO 19115, or other. By default I would expect the front runner to be TCS but it appears few if any major
systems have ever gone that route – I have looked at ITIS, COL, TROPICOS, WoRMS, IPNI, GBIF, AFD/APNI, more… the nearest would perhaps be AFD/APNI (hence copying Paul on this email) however their “ibis” schema, though apparently based originally on TCS,
<a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis-20120909.xsd">http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis-20120909.xsd</a> , does not make any explicit reference to the TCS schema so far as I can see. (Note also the cited schema definition
<a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis">http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis</a> [or presumably
<a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis.xsd">http://biodiversity.org.au/xml/ibis.xsd</a>] does not seem to exist, but maybe I am missing something).</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">I am in the interesting position of also wishing to make apps which both publish and consume taxonomic name information so *<b>could</b>* implement
TCS for these, but if no-one else is doing so maybe that is not a path to future data harmonisation, and something like DwC might be better.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">It does seem odd that we have a standard endorsed in 2005 by TDWG which is apparently unused by any current major players in the real world.
Any thoughts?</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Regards - Tony</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">Tony Rees<br>
Manager, Divisional Data Centre,<br>
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research,<br>
GPO Box 1538,<br>
Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia<br>
Ph: 0362 325318 (Int: +61 362 325318)<br>
Fax: 0362 325000 (Int: +61 362 325000)</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">e-mail:
<a href="mailto:Tony.Rees@csiro.au" title="mailto:Tony.Rees@csiro.au">Tony.Rees@csiro.au</a><br>
Manager, OBIS Australia regional node, <a href="http://www.obis.org.au/">http://www.obis.org.au/</a><br>
Biodiversity informatics research activities: <a href="http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/biodiversity.htm">
http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/biodiversity.htm</a><br>
Personal info: <a href="http://www.fishbase.org/collaborators/collaboratorsummary.cfm?id=1566" title="http://www.fishbase.org/collaborators/collaboratorsummary.cfm?id=1566">http://www.fishbase.org/collaborators/collaboratorsummary.cfm?id=1566</a></span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D">LinkedIn profile:
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-rees/18/770/36">http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-rees/18/770/36</a></span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div style="border:none; border-left:solid blue 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org">tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org</a> [<a href="mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org">mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Murray<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 7 March 2012 12:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Steve Baskauf<br>
<b>Cc:</b> "Éamonn Ó Tuama (GBIF)"; TDWG TAG<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [tdwg-tag] Creating a TDWG standard for documenting Data Standards [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On 07/03/2012, at 3:11 AM, Steve Baskauf wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
<br>
</span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Dag and Éamonn,<br>
<br>
In the context of the discussion which has been going on in the TDWG RDF mailing list, I have been thinking more about the issue of how to deal with DwC terms which state "Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary...". That would be dcterms:type,
dwc:language, dwc:basisOfRecord, dwc:sex, dwc:lifeStage, dwc:reproductiveCondition, dwc:behavior, dwc:establishmentMeans, dwc:occurrenceStatus, dwc:disposition, dwc:continent, dwc:waterBody, dwc:islandGroup, dwc:island, dwc:country, dwc:verbatimCoordinateSystem,
dwc:georeferenceVerificationStatus, dwc:identificationVerificationStatus, dwc:taxonRank; dwc:nomenclaturalCode, dwc:taxonomicStatus, dwc:relationshipOfResource, and dwc:measurementType .</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We here have had all sorts of problems using other people's vocabularies - they never quite match the data we have. Our solution has been to use the standard terms where possible, but to mint our own where needed. We
create RDF objects and to declare them as being the correct type.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">For instance, </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-tab-span"><span lang="EN-US"> </span>
</span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF"><a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/AFD">http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/AFD</a>#RelationshipTypeTerm</span></span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Is declared to be a subclass of</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-tab-span"><span lang="EN-US"> </span>
</span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#4DAC72"><a href="http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/TaxonConcept">http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/TaxonConcept#</a></span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF">TaxonRelationshipTerm</span></span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">And we have a few specific items of that type:</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:black"> </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF"><a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm">http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm</a>#has-emendation</span></span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:black"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF"><a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm">http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm</a></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF">#has-invalid-name</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:black"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF"><a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm">http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm</a></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF">#has-junior-homonym</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:black"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF"><a href="http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm">http://biodiversity.org.au/voc/afd/RelationshipTypeTerm</a></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF">#has-miscellaneous-literature-name</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">These individuals are therefore correctly typed to be legitimately be used as a TDWG </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:8.5pt; font-family:"Monaco","serif"; color:#3834FF">relationshipCategory</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">. </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">Your lists of dwc:disposition values does not need to be exhaustive. It's legitimate (from a machine point of view) for a site to create their
own terms. However, this does mean that the world becomes fragmented into a number of site-specific vocabularies that cannot be machine-reasoned over. The underlying reason for this is that that is in fact the way the world actually is at the moment, and there's
not a lot of help for it.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">-------------------------------------------------------------</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">There are two or three approaches to using a standard vocabulary when your own data does not quite match it.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">You can use the standard term that is *closest in meaning* to your own term. The difficulty here is that if the meaning of the standard term
implies things that are not true of your data, using it means that you are asserting things that are in fact not true, and for that reason I suggest that it's not the way to go.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">You can use the standard term whose definition encompasses your term. The difficulty here is that some vocabularies (notably Taxon Concept Schema)
don't have "other" or "unspecified" values for their enumerations - they are not exhaustive.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">In either of these cases, you will want to supplement the standard term with another value specific to your own data set, whose definition you
make available. There are a few ways to do that.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">You can use the "define your own term" mechanism and assert both</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> _:_ tdwg:has_relationship_type tdwg:is-subtaxon-of .</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> _:_ tdwg:has_relationship_type my-voc:is-recently-declared-subtaxon-of .</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">You can have a completely separate predicate:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> _:_ tdwg:has_relationship_type tdwg:is-subtaxon-of .</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> _:_ myvoc:has_relationship_type my-voc:is-recently-declared-subtaxon-of .</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">You can also be terribly clever and declare your own predicate to be a super-property of the TDWG predicate, one whose range is a union. This
isn't terribly useful to people using your data unless the tdwg triple is also asserted.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">Another alternative is to create an OWL rule that says </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">"if a thing has relationship-type my-voc:is-recently-declared-subtaxon-of, then it also has relationship-type tdwg:is-subtaxon-of"</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">But this creates a performance hit.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">-------------------------------------------------------------</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">That little discussion aside, my main concern is that you don't get mired in attempting to exhaustively list all the different island types (etc)
as part of the vocabulary that you are creating. It's a never-ending job. It might be an idea to have the design guideline that no enumeration class defined by the vocabulary shall have more than 10 values. It's arbitrary, but it will keep people from being
carried away subdividing types into a hierarchy that they think is a good idea, but which doesn't match the data people already have.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">I'd also suggest that that every enumeration (ie, ist of individuals) include two special values:</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">NOT_SPECIFIED. This value is not present in the source, underlying data. It isn't in the database, the respondent didn't fill out the form fully.
Perhaps "NULL" might be a better name - assuming people at this level know what it means.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">OTHER. This means the value is some specific value, but it's not covered in the TDWG list. I am not sure if this value should be explicitly used
if you are publishing your own vocabulary and using terms from that. I'm inclined to say it should not be, because doing that would result in two values for predicates that naturally should be functional.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black">These special values *can* be done as a single instance, which means you could easily pull all "not specifieds" out of a dataset, but that means
that either the ranges would have to be declared as a union, which is messy, or the individuals would have to be declared as having all possible types, which would break disjoint class declarations.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.5pt; font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"; color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><span lang="EN-US">If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of any confidentiality,
privilege or copyright in respect of information in the e-mail or attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this email.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt; margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________<br>
tdwg-tag mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org">tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</a></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span lang="EN-US">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"; color:gray">This message is only intended for the addressee named above. Its contents may be privileged or otherwise protected. Any unauthorized use, disclosure
or copying of this message or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply mail or by collect telephone call. Any personal opinions expressed in this message do not necessarily represent the
views of the Bishop Museum.</span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<font face="Arial" color="Green" size="1"><br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email<br>
Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails.<br>
The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>